Agenda Profile: Timo Suslov
Draft law amending the Rules of Procedure Act of the Riigikogu (552 SE) – first reading
2025-03-12
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
Political Position
The speaker presented the position of the lead committee, which recommends rejecting Draft Legislation 552 SE (with a vote of 6 in favor and 4 against). This stance is based on the understanding that the existing provisions of the procedural and labor laws are adequate, and the application of financial coercive measures is primarily a matter of ideology. He/She emphasized that the attendance of government members has recently improved, thereby lessening the necessity for new punitive measures.
16 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the procedures for amending the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act and in the organization of the committee's work. He/She is able to accurately state the date of the committee meeting, the attendees, the substance of the discussion, and the voting results. Furthermore, he/she refers to the constitutional procedure for expressing a vote of no confidence in ministers, thereby demonstrating knowledge of the legislative accountability mechanism.
16 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is formal, neutral, and procedural, as the speaker strictly adheres to the role of the commission's rapporteur. He/She employs logical appeals, focusing on facts, the commission's decisions, and the length of the debate, which stemmed from ideological questions. The speaker consistently avoids expressing personal opinions, stating that they will do so later, when the opportunity arises.
16 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The course of action involves reporting the results and decisions of the lead committee's session to the Riigikogu plenary assembly. The speaker actively answers questions, clarifying the committee's positions and the substance of the debate, but their involvement is limited to explaining the procedure for the specific draft bill. They referenced the committee session that took place on Tuesday, February 18th.
16 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is aimed at the substance of the draft bill, which concerns the imposition of financial coercive measures on members of the government for absence from the committee. The criticism is based on both policy and procedure, pointing out that ministerial attendance has improved and that constitutional no-confidence measures are already in place. He disagrees that rejecting the draft bill would constitute an endorsement of ministerial absences.
16 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker highlights the consensus decisions reached within the committee on procedural matters, such as placing the draft bill on the agenda and appointing the rapporteur. The speaker openly details the voting results (6 votes in favor of rejection, 4 against), indicating that the decision was made with majority support following a serious discussion. The speaker also refers to the position of Hendrik Johannes Terras, Chairman of the Constitutional Committee, regarding the procedure for submitting a motion of no confidence.
16 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Insufficient data
16 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Insufficient data
16 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Insufficient data
16 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the draft amendment to the Riigikogu Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act (552 SE), which concerns the accountability and participation of government members in committees. The speaker is the rapporteur for the leading committee, who supports the majority's position to reject the bill, as they believe the current conditions are sufficient.
16 Speeches Analyzed