AI Profiling: Peeter Ernits

The speaker's position throughout the entire period under review has been unwaveringly and sharply oppositional, accusing the Kaja Kallas and Kristen Michal governments of arrogance, incompetence, and causing the country's economic exhaustion and stagnation. The political focus is directed at opposing the government’s fiscal irresponsibility (including EU fines, subsidies, and wasteful spending), unjust laws detrimental to public welfare (such as the car tax), and uncontrolled immigration. The positioning is strongly results-oriented, emphasizing the government’s failure and laxity ("the rotten tree"), and value-based, defending citizens' fundamental rights and demanding quality in state governance.

The politician's expertise is remarkably broad, encompassing deep knowledge of energy policy, nature conservation (including specific ornithological and predator knowledge), agriculture, and regional policy. A detailed procedural awareness of legislative mechanisms, the transposition of European Union directives, and regulatory specifics is the dominant pattern, often referencing concrete paragraphs and flaws in existing laws. The speaker consistently supports their arguments with specific figures, statistics, financial instruments (e.g., green bonds, subsidy amounts), and references to scientific research, demonstrating authority in technical and financial matters.

The politician's rhetorical style is consistently extremely combative, passionate, and sharply accusatory, emphasizing the absurdity and injustice of the government’s actions. The style is predominantly informal and provocative, making extensive use of vernacular, cynical, and colorful expressions, irony, and memorable metaphors ("the mangy raccoon," "even a fool gets beaten in church"). Although the speaker relies heavily on emotional appeals and vivid anecdotes, he consistently balances these with concrete facts, figures, and logical arguments (citing audits and legislation) to lend weight to the criticism. Rhetorical questions and hyperbole are constantly employed to underscore the lack of common sense in the government’s policies.

The politician's pattern of activity is exceptionally intense and continuous, as evidenced by their active participation in the Riigikogu (Parliament) on virtually every session day throughout the entire observed period. Their involvement spans from Riigikogu plenary sessions (characterized by continuous questioning and criticism of the government) to active committee work and participation in working groups. Furthermore, they are characterized by extensive external engagement, which includes rapid responses to current events, personal visits to crisis areas, and meetings with the heads of various institutions and interest groups, thereby underscoring their own relentless work ethic.

The politician's oppositional stance is consistently directed against the ruling coalition (primarily the Reform Party and Estonia 200), who are accused of both incompetent policy-making (car tax, defense spending) and procedures damaging to democracy (steamroller politics, fast-tracking legislation). The criticism is intense and three-pronged, encompassing political, procedural, and personal attacks (arrogance, avoidance of responsibility, demands for ministerial resignations). Opponents are regularly labeled with extreme rhetoric ("regime," "banana republic"), which points to a fundamental denial of the government's legitimacy, occasionally extending the criticism to other opposition parties and the media.

The politician is largely critical but consistently stresses the need for pragmatic and cross-party cooperation, especially concerning national defense, demographic, and technical legislation. He is prepared to support initiatives from colleagues (including the opposition) as well as government bills, provided they are substantively necessary and in the interest of Estonia. He views the existence of political trust and the consideration of opinions from impartial experts (such as the Chancellor of Justice or academics) as prerequisites for cooperation, while simultaneously criticizing the government’s "steamroller" tactic as the primary impediment to productive work.

The politician maintains a strong and persistent regional focus, concentrating primarily on the issues facing rural areas in Ida-Virumaa and South Estonia (Tartu, Valga, and Põlva counties). He consistently positions himself as a defender of rural residents and small producers (such as beekeepers), fighting against the decline of the provinces caused by the centralization of services in Tallinn. He repeatedly raises issues concerning the negative impact of national policies (like the proposed car tax) on rural life, as well as opposition to onshore wind turbine plans, which threaten local heritage landscapes and generate conflict.

The politician's economic views are strongly anchored in demands for strict fiscal responsibility and austerity, sharply opposing tax hikes and government waste, especially inefficient renewable energy subsidies, which he views as wealth redistribution benefiting businessmen. He strongly advocates for cutting bureaucracy and regulations (such as sustainability reports) to ease the burden on Estonian entrepreneurs, while simultaneously demanding the government take a more active role in protecting the interests of local producers and SMEs. The politician is deeply pessimistic about the state of the economy, sharply criticizing the stagnation and high inflation that is forcing consumers into extreme belt-tightening. His criticism also targets the government's priorities, contrasting cuts to social and regional services with the state's large expenditures (such as defense spending).

The politician's socio-political profile is national-conservative, focusing on Estonia's demographic crisis and a strict immigration policy (demanding adherence to the 0.1% limit), which is directly linked to the preservation of the Estonian language and culture. He/She passionately defends civil liberties, vigorously opposing the state's preventative totalitarian trajectory (e.g., the RAB super database), while simultaneously criticizing cuts to social benefits and the economic exhaustion of the populace. On value issues, he/she holds traditional positions, opposing gender quotas and expressing respect for the church, while viewing certain value debates (e.g., women's rights) as a distraction from the people's real distress. Overall, he/she emphasizes constitutional freedoms and the preservation of the nation-state, combining cultural conservatism with a socio-populist concern for people's livelihoods.

The politician's legislative focus is predominantly process-centric, emphasizing the improvement of legislative quality and procedural accountability, demanding adequate impact assessments, and criticizing the Riigikogu (Parliament) as a "rubber stamp." He is a consistent and vocal opponent of fast-tracked coalition bills that are detrimental to citizens or threaten privacy (e.g., the super database, the car tax, amendments to the Church Law). He also opposes the transposition of bureaucratic EU directives, viewing them as insignificant substitute activities during economically challenging times, while simultaneously supporting practical and concrete solutions (such as the construction of shelters or amendments to the Hunting Law).