Session Profile: Rain Epler
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
2024-01-11
Political Position
The political focus is directed toward criticizing existing systems and ensuring the procedural correctness of legislative work. The speaker criticizes the healthcare system's tendency toward centralization (specifically in the context of home births) and stresses the necessity for committee rapporteurs to grasp the substantive intent of the draft legislation. They emphasize the importance of the Parliament Board's decision-making authority and effective inter-committee cooperation. The overall position is more value-driven (transparency, competence) than purely policy-driven.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in Riigikogu parliamentary procedure, particularly concerning the competence of committees, the role of the rapporteur, and established good practices. They are also knowledgeable about the functioning of the medical system and systemic pressure (illustrated by the example of home birth). Furthermore, they reference the work of the European Union Affairs Committee related to the Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, which encompasses a broad scope of topics, including water quality and product labeling.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The style is analytical and procedure-centric, often employing questions to guide the discussion or critique incompetence. The speaker is forthright, acknowledging strong performances while simultaneously sharply criticizing colleagues for deviating from the substance of the law. The emphasis is placed on logic, systematic criticism, and adherence to good parliamentary practices.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker was active during the plenary session on January 11, repeatedly posing questions both to the bill's rapporteurs and to experienced colleagues regarding parliamentary procedure. This pattern of activity indicates a focus on the quality of floor debates and procedural details.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The opposition is primarily aimed at systemic inertia (the medical system's desire to route everything through its own channels) and the violation of parliamentary work procedures. [The speaker] criticizes colleague Pakosta for straying from the substance of the matter and pointedly asks whether the board's decisions are deemed inadequate. The criticism targets both procedural incompetence and substantive inaccuracy.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
The speaker emphasizes the importance of inter-committee cooperation, proposing that seeking input from other committees (such as the Social Affairs Committee) be utilized as a solution. The speaker commends the rapporteurs for providing extensive background and supporting the substance of the draft legislation, thereby demonstrating openness to constructive discussion. The speaker is ready to resolve jurisdictional conflicts through collaboration.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
No data available
3 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
No data available.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The social topic of home birth is addressed, focusing on the assessment of associated risks and the systemic pressure exerted by the medical system to channel individuals into hospitals. It is stressed that the system naturally desires everything to proceed through its established channels, and the potential flexibility of doctors when issuing documentation is also mentioned.
3 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is directed towards adhering to parliamentary procedures and good practices, particularly ensuring the substantive expertise of committee rapporteurs. Participation occurs in debates concerning healthcare regulation and the delimitation of committee jurisdiction regarding draft legislation. The question is raised as to whether the Legal Affairs Committee should seek input from the Social Affairs Committee.
3 Speeches Analyzed