Agenda Profile: Helir-Valdor Seeder
Draft law amending the Weapons Act and, in consequence thereof, amending other laws (468 SE) – Second Reading
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
Political Position
The political position is aimed at ensuring procedural fairness within the Riigikogu, specifically by demanding a separate vote on the Isamaa faction's amendments regarding changes to the Weapons Act. He/She defends Isamaa against accusations that they are not taking national defense seriously, while simultaneously underscoring the practical relevance of their own proposals. The focus rests heavily on procedures and political accountability.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise regarding the procedural rules of the Riigikogu and the handling of amendments, particularly concerning the explanatory memoranda of the draft bill and the decisions made by the lead committee. He/She is able to compare the ways proposals from various factions are processed and directly links the amendments to the Weapons Act with the 2025 state budget draft bill.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and procedural, focusing on logical inconsistencies within the Riigikogu procedures. The speaker poses questions to the presiding officer to seek advice and clarification, while simultaneously adopting a slightly defensive tone when responding to a colleague's accusations. Finally, the style becomes specific and demanding, requesting that the amendment be put to a vote.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is active in the legislative process, participating in the second reading of the draft Weapons Act, where they raise procedural questions and call for a vote on the proposed amendment. Their activity is aimed at defending the faction's proposals and ensuring the transparency of the proceedings.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is aimed at the Steering Committee’s decisions concerning the bundling of Isamaa’s amendments, viewing this as an unfair procedure compared to the proposals put forward by the National Defence Committee. Furthermore, the criticism leveled by colleague Kaljulaid regarding Isamaa’s engagement with national defence issues is rejected. The criticism itself is primarily procedural and politically defensive.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The style of cooperation is faction-centered, focused on defending Isamaa's proposals and rights. Although the speaker does turn to the presiding officer for advice, there is no indication of openness to compromises or collaboration with other political parties.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Data is scarce.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Information is scarce. The only economic reference relates to the mention of the 2025 state budget draft, but no substantive positions regarding the budget, taxes, or spending are presented.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Social issues are addressed indirectly through amendments to the Weapons Act concerning national defense and security. Specific positions on broader social topics (e.g., education, immigration) have not been presented.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on the draft Act amending the Weapons Act (468 SE), with the speaker acting as the proponent for the amendments submitted by Isamaa. Significant emphasis is also being placed on procedural matters and the bill's connection to the 2025 state budget.
2 Speeches Analyzed