Agenda Profile: Rain Epler

The political position is strongly critical of Draft Bill 511 SE, which proposes amendments to the State Budget Law, as it grants ministers excessive freedom to reallocate expenditures during the fiscal year without the knowledge of the Riigikogu (Parliament). The main focus is directed toward strengthening the transparency of the state budget and parliamentary oversight, citing the 2.4 billion euros in unclear financial movements identified by the National Audit Office. The stance is policy- and performance-based, demanding the use of "shall" instead of "may" in the legislation.

The speaker demonstrates profound expertise in matters of state budget law and financial control, focusing on the technical specifics of the draft legislation, such as the usage of the word "may" and the mandatory requirement to detail the economic classification of expenditures. This expertise is further backed up by references to the analysis conducted by the National Audit Office (Riigikontroll) and a proposal to set specific limits on the transfer of funds by ministers. He/She is capable of differentiating between the consequences of moving funds designated for investments versus those allocated for other types of expenditures.

The rhetorical style is predominantly analytical and critical, containing direct questions and accusations concerning the minister’s demagogic rhetoric (the analogy regarding the wallet was "rather silly and inappropriate"). Although the initial tone is skeptical and demanding, the speaker concludes on an optimistic note, emphasizing the hope that his proposed amendments will find support. Logical arguments and references to institutional studies are employed.

The speaker is actively involved in the legislative process, intensely participating in the first reading of the draft bill to amend the State Budget Act. They refer to a previous debate (which took place yesterday) with the same minister, demonstrating consistent and direct engagement with the issue.

The opposition is directed at the Minister of Finance and the government bill, which is primarily criticized due to procedural shortcomings and the excessive discretionary authority granted to ministers when transferring funds. The criticism is policy-based, but also includes a personal assessment of the minister's rhetoric. A compromise is possible because the speaker plans to submit an amendment proposal, to which the minister has reportedly reacted positively.

Even though the speaker opened with criticism, accusing the minister of demagoguery, he demonstrated a willingness to engage in constructive cooperation. He intends to submit an amendment aimed at addressing the bill's shortcomings, and he is optimistic that this proposal will also gain the support of the Finance Minister.

Not enough data.

Economic views emphasize the transparency of the state budget and strict fiscal discipline, requiring the mandatory itemization of expenditures according to economic cost types. The objective is to curb ministers' arbitrary reallocation of funds, which could affect millions intended for investments, thereby ensuring that the use of money remains traceable by the Riigikogu.

Not enough data.

The legislative focus is on the draft bill amending the State Budget Act (511 SE), which the speaker opposes but intends to submit amendments to. The objective is to make the detailed breakdown of the budget according to economic expenditures mandatory and to restrict ministers' right to reallocate funds using reasonable limits.