Session Profile: Rain Epler
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
2024-11-06
Political Position
The political focus is clearly on the car tax issue, where the speaker demands clarification regarding the original justifications for implementing the tax and its projected positive impact on Estonia's future development. He criticizes the actions of the government or the relevant committee concerning the handling of opposition bills and the absence of high-quality discussion. The position taken is heavily based on policy and procedural matters, calling into question both the necessity of the tax and the seriousness of the Isamaa party regarding its eventual abolition.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates knowledge of the Riigikogu’s procedural rules and committee work, particularly concerning the procedure for rejecting draft legislation. They are also aware of previous session debates (specifically Toomas Kivimägi’s stance on the quality of the discussion). Furthermore, the speaker references the tax rapporteur’s past activities (as the face of the 1992 Audi advertisement), thereby introducing historical context.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is questioning and critical, focusing on details and procedural fairness. A personal historical reference ("the face of the campaign") is used toward the tax rapporteur to emphasize the thoroughness of the tax. The speaker demands clear argumentation instead of passionate opposition, suggesting that the committee's work may have been rushed.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker actively participates in the plenary session by posing several detailed questions to the rapporteur. He is well-versed in the Riigikogu's recent procedural debates, referencing a discussion that took place either last week or the week prior.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The speaker, who is in the opposition, is criticizing the committee for rushing the rejection of the opposition's draft bill. They cast doubt on the sincerity of the Isamaa party (Mart/Kokk) concerning the abolition of the car tax, implying that their actions in the committee were contradictory. The criticism is aimed both at the content of the policy and at the procedural injustice.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Information regarding cooperation is lacking; the speaker focuses instead on the critical analysis of the actions and arguments of other parties (the commission, Isamaa). He demands transparency and a high-quality discussion, referencing an earlier position held by Toomas Kivimägi.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
Not enough data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives center on tax policy, expressing strong criticism of the proposed vehicle tax. A clear justification is demanded regarding how this tax will advance the Estonian economy, given the existing skepticism about its utility. The primary focus remains on the overall national tax burden and its resulting impact.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
Not enough data
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is on the bill to abolish the motor vehicle tax and its processing within the Riigikogu committee. The speaker is demanding clarification as to why the committee proposed rejecting the bill and what arguments were used for this purpose. He is acting as a scrutinizer of the procedure and an opponent of the car tax.
2 Speeches Analyzed