Agenda Profile: Riina Solman
A written request for a vote of no confidence in Prime Minister Kristen Michal, submitted by 29 members of the Riigikogu.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
Political Position
The political stance is fiercely oppositional, centered on the government's procedural missteps and the negative consequences of its policies. Key issues include rising energy prices and the burden placed on taxpayers via subsidized projects, alongside the demographic crisis, which is exacerbated by eroding family security. The overall position is highly critical, highlighting both the government's inefficiency and fundamental value-based questions regarding future generations.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the field of energy policy and financing, specifically mentioning offshore wind farms valued at 2.6 billion euros, subsidies, and infrastructure vulnerability. Detailed knowledge of the demographic situation is also presented, highlighting the population decrease (by over 5,000 people) and the birth rate (under 10,000), while also referencing specific tax benefits that were removed from families.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is critical, sharp, and penetrating, utilizing both logical arguments (costs, statistics) and emotional appeals. Strong rhetorical questions are employed, emphasizing the government's responsibility to future generations ("What will we tell our children?") and the impoverishment of the taxpayer. The address is formal ("Honorable Prime Minister!"), but confrontational in substance.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The data is limited to three brief appearances in the Riigikogu on a single day, specifically during the debate on the motion of no confidence.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The confrontation is directed against Prime Minister Kristen Michal and the coalition leaders, criticizing their decision-making process (deciding among three people, excluding parliament and the Minister of Finance) as undemocratic. The criticism is also leveled at the actions of the previous government (Kaja Kallas) for undermining family policy. The criticism is intense and focuses on both procedural and political errors.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The data is lacking because the speaker is focused on criticizing the government and highlighting its internal collaboration issues (reference to Ligi's criticism).
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is clearly national, addressing Estonia’s energy capacity, the demographic crisis, and the burden on the taxpayer. International comparisons are drawn, referencing studies and proposals initiated by Finland aimed at supporting childbirth.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The economic perspective is sharply critical of subsidized large-scale projects that generate profits for selected businesses, while leaving the costs and risks (e.g., infrastructure protection) to be borne by the taxpayer. We oppose tax increases and support the restoration of tax benefits for families (such as joint declaration benefits and income tax exemption) to alleviate the financial strain on taxpayers.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The socio-political focus centers on the demographic crisis and family policy, stressing the necessity of supporting people's desire to have children and restoring a sense of security for families. Criticism is aimed at the removal of legally established measures from families with children, which, according to Ene-Margit Tiit, constitutes the worst possible family policy.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The speaker is acting as an opposition critic and questioner, demanding a clear government program for solving demographic problems, and noting that the coalition agreement contains absolutely no mention of the issue. Priorities are focused on protecting taxpayers from energy costs and reinstating family benefits.
3 Speeches Analyzed