Agenda Profile: Helir-Valdor Seeder
Draft law amending the Waste Act and, in consequence, amending other laws (461 SE) - second reading
2024-12-10
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the government’s proposed draft amendment to the Waste Act (461 SE), emphasizing that the bill legalizes risk and contains fundamental flaws. Criticism is also aimed at the government’s broader fiscal policy, citing confusion between the promised "tax peace" and the introduction of new levies (the security tax). The framing of the opposition is primarily policy- and procedure-based, focusing on the negative impact of the legislation on specific interest groups.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates strong expertise regarding the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act and related procedural regulations, particularly concerning the requirements for voting on amendments and ensuring the validity of documents. Furthermore, they exhibit knowledge of taxation terminology, stressing the necessity of clearly differentiating between cost-based state fees and environmental charges.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical, legally precise, and at times confrontational, particularly concerning the government's alleged disarray. The arguments are primarily logical and legal, focusing on definitions and strict adherence to procedural rules. Sharp rhetorical questions are employed to challenge the speaker's positions and underscore the seriousness of procedural errors.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker was highly active during one session day (December 10), repeatedly participating in the discussion regarding procedural issues and the voting on amendments. This pattern of activity is focused on ensuring the integrity of the legislative process and challenging flawed documents.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary conflict involves the government and the bill's rapporteur, who is being criticized both for substantive errors and procedural deficiencies, such as the submission of faulty tables of amendments. The government is being accused of incompetence and confusion regarding tax policy, citing the prime minister's statements concerning "tax peace" and the security tax. Instead of a compromise, they are demanding that the reading be suspended and the errors corrected.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The collaborative approach is strict and demanding, focusing on rectifying procedural flaws, and urging the chamber to vote for the suspension of the reading. Agreement is expressed with the colleague (Mart Maastik)'s view regarding the perilous nature of the legislation. No willingness to compromise is apparent; instead, there is a demand for the immediate harmonization of the documents with reality.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic viewpoints stress the need for clear definitions and the cost-covering principle for taxes and duties, specifically criticizing state fees that fail to adhere to a cost-based structure. The text criticizes the ambiguity of the government's tax policy and the implementation of new taxes (the security tax), arguing that these measures breach the commitment to tax stability. Furthermore, concern is raised regarding regulations that compel those preserving cultural heritage (owners of vintage vehicles) to pay unjustly high charges.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
It focuses on preserving cultural heritage, protecting the interests of vintage vehicle restorers and owners from unfair taxation that would prevent them from participating in exhibitions. It also points to the necessity of laws when regulating conflicting social situations, since "you don't choose your neighbors."
6 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The main legislative focus is the second reading of the draft amendment to the Waste Act (461 SE). The speaker is a strong opponent of the bill and initiated the interruption of the reading, stressing the necessity of bringing the procedural documents (tables of proposed amendments) into alignment with reality. The priority is procedural correctness and rectifying errors before the vote.
6 Speeches Analyzed