Session Profile: Kalle Grünthal

Political positions are heavily focused on defending Estonia's sovereign right to decide against European Union directives (specifically regarding the changing of the clocks) and prioritizing public health. He/She is firmly opposed to the deployment of anti-personnel mines due to humanitarian considerations, stressing the necessity of preventing civilian casualties. Furthermore, he/she defends the free mandate and immunity of a member of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament), criticizing the muzzling effect of the ERJK (Political Party Financing Surveillance Committee) system. His/Her political framework is strongly value-based, emphasizing independence and the welfare of the people.

The speaker demonstrates expertise in the fields of public health and chronobiology, citing specific studies on the negative impact of daylight saving time changes (heart attacks, sleep disorders). They are also familiar with technological advancements in warfare (drones, IEDs) and criticize the lack of a national supervision methodology for measuring wind farm noise. Furthermore, constitutional arguments regarding the procedure for foreign relations and the competence of the parliament are relied upon.

The rhetorical style is a blend of logical argumentation (referencing scientists, WHO guidelines, and historical facts) and strong emotional and graphic language, particularly on the topic of mines. The tone is often critical and challenging, accusing opponents of outdated thinking or a lack of resolve. Strong metaphors concerning independence and liberation are employed (Moscow vs. Brussels, Pandora's box).

The speaker is highly active during the plenary session, serving both as the rapporteur for draft legislation and asking and answering questions on various subjects. He/She initiates draft laws and actively participates in debates, also referencing prior discussions held in the committees.

The opposition is primarily directed at ministry officials, who are criticized for their lack of knowledge, bureaucratic inertia, and unwillingness to act independently. He/She also criticizes the presumed actions of the Reform Party in rejecting the bill, as well as military leaders for their outdated mindset. The criticism is mainly focused on policy and procedure, but it also includes doubts regarding the motives of the opponents (ERJK).

The collaborative approach is open to compromises on details—for instance, regarding the choice of time zone when abolishing the practice of changing clocks (daylight saving time)—provided the main objective is achieved. He/She refers to prior communication with colleagues (Leo Kunnas) and notes the support for his/her arguments from ministry representatives (e.g., Triinu Sillamaa).

The focus is primarily national (Estonian public health, national defense) and international (EU directives, the Ottawa Treaty). He/She emphasizes Estonia's potential to be a guide in Europe. Regional focus is absent, except for references to Estonia's territorial depth in the context of defense.

Economic analyses emphasize that changing the clocks does not yield energy savings; instead, it harms the economy by reducing productivity and negatively affecting dairy herds. He rejects officials’ claims that abolishing the time change would lead to major economic and organizational problems, demanding statistical proof.

Among social issues, public health is at the forefront, emphasizing the negative impact of daylight saving time (increased heart attacks, suicides, and sleep disorders). There is also a strong humanitarian focus on protecting civilians from the threat of post-war landmines. He/She also raises the potential health problems associated with wind farms (heart failure, sleep disorders).

The primary legislative priority is initiating and supporting the bill to end the practice of changing the clocks, relying on the Public Health Act. He/She is also active in debates regarding withdrawal from national defense conventions and the reform of political financing oversight (ERJK). He/She stresses that legislative decisions must be consistent with the Constitution and the full mandate of Parliament.