Agenda Profile: Aivar Sõerd
Second reading of the draft law on the state's supplementary budget for 2025 (651 SE)
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
Political Position
The political position is strongly focused on the scrutiny of budgetary procedures and transparency. The speaker questions the government's proposal to allocate 1.5–2 million euros to the development of SKAIS, arguing that the savings indicated as the funding source, derived from the Ministry of Social Affairs' operating costs, do not comply with the program-based structure of the budget. The stance is policy-driven and critical, emphasizing the resolution of fiscal discrepancies.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates detailed knowledge of the budget structure, differentiating traditional expenditure lines (such as travel and translation services) from program-based budgeting (e.g., health sector programs). They are familiar with specific IT developments (SKAIS) and the details of the Ministry of Social Affairs' operational costs, utilizing technical terminology when discussing budget lines and programs.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on logical questions and discrepancies within the budget procedure. The tone is critical, yet substantive, emphasizing factual issues (the absence of expenditure lines) in the government's proposal. Direct questions are used when addressing the presenter to demand clarification regarding the funding mechanisms.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The data indicates participation in the second reading of the draft State Supplementary Budget Act for 2025. The speaker refers to their activity within the committee, where amendments were discussed.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary criticism is directed at the government because the funding sources proposed for their supplementary budget are unclear and conflict with the existing budgetary structure. Additionally, the speaker supports the committee's decision to reject the Isamaa amendment, criticizing it as "completely generalized," a move that demonstrates procedural rigor.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Expresses support for the commission's work and its decision regarding the Isamaa amendment, emphasizing that the commission was "on the right track" in rejecting the non-compliant proposal. This indicates a readiness to support procedural consensus.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is entirely on the national level, addressing the supplementary budget, the operating costs of the Ministry of Social Affairs, and nationwide IT developments (SKAIS). There is no regional or local focus.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
The text supports strict budget discipline and transparency in public spending. It criticizes the government's attempts to finance major projects (SKAIS) by relying on vague savings measures that are incompatible with the existing budget structure, a stance that clearly signals fiscal conservatism.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Social issues are discussed in the context of budgeting and financing, with reference to Ministry of Social Affairs programs, specifically the development of a health-supporting environment and the field of person-centered healthcare. There is concern regarding how cost savings are being implemented within these programs.
1 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The primary legislative focus is the draft State Supplementary Budget Act for 2025 (Bill 651 SE). The speaker is acting as a critical interrogator, calling into question the funding scheme proposed by the government and its compliance with the existing budgetary structure.
1 Speeches Analyzed