By Plenary Sessions: Andre Hanimägi
Total Sessions: 75
Fully Profiled: 75
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is initially surprised and defensive, quickly shifting to being direct and argumentative, using strong contrasts (e.g., the Centre Party versus the PPA). The speaker employs both logical appeal and direct criticism regarding the opponents’ procedural inaction. He acknowledges the government’s “bungling” in drafting the legislation but maintains focus on a swift solution.
2025-10-07
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and critical, presenting sharp questions to the minister regarding the contradictions in government policy. A logical appeal is employed, contrasting the government's claims concerning VAT on foodstuffs with the actual outcomes of the income tax changes.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The style is rational and persuasive, focusing on the logical balance where the benefit of security outweighs the minimal infringement of personal freedoms. The speaker employs rhetorical contrast to criticize opponents for appealing to emotions and to urge listeners to think rationally. The tone is formal, yet includes urgent emphasis on the needs of the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA).
2025-09-22
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and sharply critical, especially regarding the government's inaction and procedural chaos, which is described as "bizarre" and "over the top" confusion. Both logical arguments (legal correctness, proportionality) and emotional pressure (references to unsolved crimes) are employed. Initially, there is noticeable ironic praise concerning the Prime Minister being "on a stand-up roll."
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
The style is formal, analytical, and procedural, focusing on conveying the legal committee's deliberations and procedural decisions. It employs logical appeals, emphasizing that disagreements between the Riigikogu (Parliament) and the President constitute a normal democratic process that ought to be settled by the Supreme Court. The tone is persuasive and defensive, refuting accusations of ideological control or restrictions on religious freedom.
2025-09-16
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The speaker's style is formal and respectful, addressing the Chancellor of Justice directly and thanking him/her. The rhetoric is analytical and question-oriented, focusing on the legal aspect of the problem (revenge porn) and the need to find solutions. The tone is serious and concerned regarding the protection of victims.
2025-09-15
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical and inquiry-based, focusing on the objective assessment of the situation and the establishment of facts. The speaker utilizes authoritative sources (the defense industry association, the prime minister) to support their stance, thereby highlighting the gravity of the government's failure to act. The tone is formal and analytical, as questions are directed to the minister.
2025-09-11
15th Riigikogu, 6th plenary sitting
The style is formal and analytical, but includes an urgent call to action, particularly concerning the financial ombudsman bill. The address relies on logical arguments, citing the overburdening of the judicial system and low consumer awareness. Finally, direct and figurative language is employed ("we take this bill out of the drawer, wipe the dust off") to mobilize political will.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The speaker's style is formal and analytical, particularly when reporting on the committee's work, but becomes passionate when emphasizing social needs (the deficit in the Health Insurance Fund) and the Riigikogu's obligation to stand up for the people. They use clear metaphors ("a huge, huge hole") and frame the discussion through ideological debate, balancing procedural information with value-based arguments.
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and question-driven, addressing the minister directly. The tone is critical and demanding, highlighting both the negative social impact of the government's decisions and presenting logical evidence (such as the advance payment example from the audit) concerning financial management issues.
2025-09-08
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly formal and analytical, focusing on logical arguments and highlighting specific issues (e.g., legal vacuum, ethical problems). The text employs both ethical appeals (such as the dignified end of life) and pragmatic ones (like the regional impact of tax policy), and it calls for constructive debate. Humorous introductions are sometimes used as well, for instance, by referencing the repetition of Lauri Laats' name.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The discourse is formal and analytical, often relying on facts, references to legal codes, and statistics. The tone is predominantly critical and demanding, especially when addressing the government, stressing the necessity of assuming political responsibility and resolving situations swiftly. Both logical arguments (bringing into compliance with the constitution) and emotional appeals (money lost by the elderly) are employed.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is forceful and persuasive, combining legal clarity with emotional appeals, especially when defending victims of financial fraud ("coffin money"). The speaker frequently employs emphasis and repetition (e.g., the magnitude of the damages) and is blunt and accusatory regarding critical issues (the shutting down of cameras). He attempts to alleviate fears and clarify the true intent of the proposed legislation, drawing a distinction between the institution and faith.
2025-06-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and analytical, emphasizing pragmatism and practicality and aiming to defuse emotional responses. The speaker uses a set of questions to draw attention to procedural shortcomings and demand greater public transparency and clarity. The tone is critical, but not attacking, focusing on the search for better solutions.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is twofold: in socio-political issues, it is passionate and critical, accusing opponents of "perverse politics" and hypocrisy. However, as a rapporteur for the Legal Committee, the style is very formal, cautious, and procedural, focusing on legal definitions, committee protocols, and emphasizing consensus. The appeals are primarily logical, relying on both statistics and legal arguments.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and confrontational, posing direct questions to the prime minister regarding accountability and inequality. Logical appeals are employed, stressing that the prime minister must serve as the prime minister for all of Estonia, and the opposing party's actions are branded a "rating crisis."
2025-06-09
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and urgent, employing strong language such as "screw-up" and "political hot air." The speaker uses logical arguments (case law, system efficiency) to counter the irrational "phobia" regarding the surveillance society. The overall tone is accusatory, emphasizing the time wasted and the danger created by the government.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, persuasive, and persistent, emphasizing the logic and simplicity of the draft bill ("If something is done poorly, do it again"). The speaker employs logical arguments to justify the necessity of the legal amendment and is critical of the inaction displayed by the government and the coalition, even utilizing sarcasm regarding the political ping-pong games. The overall tone is businesslike, yet it conveys an urgent need for change.
2025-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is urgent and critical, emphasizing the seriousness of the problem and its impact on the future of young people. The speaker uses logical arguments, backed by extensive statistics, but also includes an emotional appeal: that housing should not be an unattainable luxury, but a fundamental right. He addresses both the minister and the young people listening from the balcony directly, while maintaining a formal and analytical tone.
2025-06-02
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The style is formal, but the tone is critical and demanding, particularly regarding the government's indecisiveness. Figurative expressions like "pingpong" and "the notorious brake" are used to emphasize political stalling. The focus is on logical argumentation and demanding concrete decisions, considering the request for additional analyses to be a delay tactic.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is serious, formal, and logical, emphasizing the pragmatic need for security while balancing it with humanitarian values. Fact-based arguments are employed, citing the decisions of neighboring countries and the experience of Ukraine to justify withdrawal from the convention. The address is directed both to colleagues in the Riigikogu and to "foreign friends," delivering a clear message regarding Estonia's will to defend itself.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and procedural, focusing on summarizing the commission's deliberations and legal disputes. It strives to maintain neutrality and logical argumentation, while simultaneously offering a sharp response to political rhetoric (e.g., the accusation that the state is fighting nuns). It repeatedly emphasizes that the law's objective is to prevent influence activities, not to restrict religious freedom.
2025-05-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is questioning and concerned, focusing on logical and procedural arguments regarding political accountability and budget assurance. Formal language is employed, and the minister is addressed directly, demanding clarification concerning the political levers. The tone is analytical, not emotional.
2025-05-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting.
The style is formal, analytical, and cautious, relying on logical arguments and statistics. The speaker repeatedly poses probing questions to the minister to ascertain the government's true objective (bureaucracy versus the increase in arms). He/She references foreign practices and studies to underscore the gravity of his/her position and the potential risks involved.
2025-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and constructive, respectfully addressing the Deputy Speaker and the Minister. The speaker employs moral and emotional appeals, highlighting the despicable nature of defrauding the elderly. Nevertheless, the presentation remains logical, offering concrete political solutions (the creation of an action plan) and requesting the ministry's input.
2025-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, posing several specific and pointed questions to the minister. The tone is demanding and focuses on achieving transparency, especially regarding the "brutal cuts" articulated by the coalition partner.
2025-05-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is direct, critical, and demanding, utilizing rhetorical questions to criticize the government's inaction and delays (e.g., the sarcastic phrase "a long time coming, a beautiful thing"). The emphasis is placed on logical argumentation and the demand that political decisions be substantiated by thorough analyses, rather than mere political "waffling" or "fuss." The overall tone is one of concern regarding the regional policy consequences.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, neutral, and focused on procedural reporting, presenting the decisions of the Legal Affairs Committee and a summary of the discussion. The speaker employs a logical approach, clarifying the substance of the draft bill and the rationale behind the proposed amendments, while strictly avoiding emotional appeals. The tone is professional and informative, beginning with customary greetings ("Thank you, Deputy Speaker! Esteemed colleagues!").
2025-04-22
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, but includes a slight self-consciousness about the unusual nature of the topic ("how many people are looking at me strangely right now"). The speaker employs logical argumentation, emphasizing the economic benefits, and directly addresses a question to the minister, while simultaneously criticizing the topic's omission from the previous discussion.
2025-04-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style adopted in the Riigikogu chamber is interrogative, demanding, and at times sharp, particularly concerning the substantive quality of the responses. The speaker criticizes those responding who merely read prepared texts and condemns the "political fluff," insisting on a focus on the content of the draft bill. The overall tone is well-argued, stressing the importance of analysis and facts.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is analytical and critical, highlighting procedural flaws and the erosion of trust. It employs both logical arguments (referencing the Labour Inspectorate, the National Audit Office, and fines) and a strong moral appeal, especially concerning human rights violations and the public sense of justice (the Pihlakodu case). The tone is predominantly concerned and demanding, urging substantive analysis and engagement.
2025-04-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is respectful and professional, addressing the Chancellor of Justice directly to find a solution. The tone is concerned regarding the referral of citizens to the administrative court, emphasizing the need for a logical and legislative amendment. The speaker uses a direct question format to seek legal advice on how to change the law so that the modification is permanent and legally valid.
2025-03-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker employs a highly formal, procedural, and analytical style, concentrating on facts and rules of procedure. The tone is measured and defensive, particularly when responding to questions regarding legal non-compliance, repeatedly stressing that the ultimate authority for decision-making rests with the court, not with politicians. The speech utilizes extensive legal terminology and references to committee deliberations.
2025-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet it incorporates sharp and challenging rhetorical questions regarding the opponent's confidence in security institutions. When addressing the Minister, the speaker employs sarcasm and indirect criticism concerning his ability to handle multiple issues, including the economy. The emphasis lies on logical and procedural argumentation, which calls into question the necessity of the proposed new laws.
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and procedure-driven, characteristic of a commission rapporteur explaining a complex procedural process. The speaker employs logical appeals, detailing the positions of the agencies and the frequency of the commission's deliberations (four times), in order to justify the decisions reached. Emotional or personal appeals are absent; the emphasis rests on the intent of the law and procedural rulings.
2025-03-18
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly formal, analytical, and explanatory, especially when detailing the history of legislative procedure and technical specifics. On the subject of party financing, the tone shifts to become slightly defensive and persuasive, directly countering the claims of the opposition and emphasizing shared democratic interests. Logical arguments and procedural referencing are employed.
2025-03-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and direct, beginning with a polite greeting to the Prime Minister ("strength to your work"). The speaker adopts a critical yet businesslike tone, focusing on logical questions regarding the government's work organization and procedural shortcomings (the absence of calculations).
2025-02-19
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, detailed, and explanatory, consistent with the role of a committee rapporteur, where the referencing of procedures and discussions predominates. It employs logical arguments and legal references to justify restrictions based on national security considerations. The closing statement incorporates a moderately emotional tone, expressing regret over the situation and reassuring believers that the draft bill is not directed against their faith.
2025-02-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is varied: at times pedagogical and instructive (when addressing a young colleague), at others sarcastic and aggressive, particularly towards the opposition's draft bills (created using AI) and the former leadership of the Centre Party. The overall tone is defensively confident, stressing that democracy is the art of compromise. It employs numerous rhetorical questions and direct appeals to the opponent.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and supportive, focusing on the logical explanation of the bill’s substantive changes and the justification of their positive impact. The argumentation is primarily logical and based on resolving procedural issues. Although the tone is generally optimistic regarding the reform, caution is expressed concerning the balance between transparency and the presumption of innocence when publishing court decisions.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is critical and analytical, employing strong judgments (e.g., "a total lie" and "actually makes a mockery of the issue") to characterize the poor quality of the opposition's draft bill. The appeal itself is primarily logical and fact-based, focusing on the budget impact and the necessity of avoiding a 400-million "experiment." The speaker requested additional time, suggesting a desire to address the topic comprehensively.
2024-12-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and analytical, but becomes emotional and urgent when addressing crimes that shock society, such as vigilantism committed by minors and serious crimes against the person. The speaker balances logical argumentation when defending the budget with strong emotional appeals regarding the necessity of ensuring justice and security. He repeatedly uses phrases like "shocked" and "deeply offends society."
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, factual, and procedural, making it suitable for the role of a committee rapporteur. The speaker focuses on logical arguments, thoroughly explaining the procedural history of the draft legislation, the substance of the debates, and the rationale behind the proposed amendments. Emotional appeals are avoided; the emphasis is placed on facts, consensus, and the specifics of the legislative process.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is considered, constructive, and rational, emphasizing that any amendment to the constitution must be a rational, not an emotional, decision. The speaker employs formal language and relies on logical and legal arguments, calling for compromises and the balancing of society. The sharpness of the debate is welcomed, but the necessity of being fair and legally sound is underscored.
2024-11-19
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is highly formal and procedural, focusing on a detailed account of the bill's history and the legal committee's deliberations. The speaker employs logical arguments and constantly references the committee minutes, maintaining a neutral and explanatory tone. Emotional appeals are not utilized; the emphasis is placed solely on the transparent description of the legislative process.
2024-11-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, challenging, and persistent, centering on logical argumentation and the rigorous testing of the opposing party's positions. The speaker repeatedly employs direct questions ("I ask you...") to elicit alternative solutions and highlight the fallacious nature of the opponent's arguments (such as appealing to anecdotal evidence). The tone remains formal and courteous, yet fundamentally adversarial in content.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is interrogative and procedural, expressing confusion ("I got into a bit of a bind") and concern ("I am worried") about straying from the topic of the debate. Direct questions are employed to verify that the draft bill currently under consideration is indeed the one the committee worked on, emphasizing the logical appeal regarding the substance of the law.
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is extremely formal, informative, and procedural, focusing on the detailed reporting of the legal committee's work and the proposed amendments. The speaker employs logical argumentation and a neutral tone, avoiding emotional appeals. The presentation is structured based on chronological and substantive reporting.
2024-10-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The style is formal, procedural, and analytical, focusing on conveying the work of the Legal Affairs Committee and the opinion of the Government of the Republic. The speaker uses logical arguments and technical terms, avoiding emotional appeals. In the third speech, the tone is more defensive, intended to refute the impression of selective interpretation and to clarify the actual nature of the deadlines for applications for review.
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is highly formal, neutral, and procedural, concentrating on the detailed and chronological reporting of the proceedings within the Riigikogu Legal Affairs Committee. The speaker employs a logical structure to clarify the substance of the draft legislation, the progression of the debate, and the consensus-based procedural rulings. Emotional or personal appeals are entirely lacking.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and inquisitive, respectfully addressing the chairman and the minister. The speaker begins with an emotional assessment ("How good it would be...") and then moves on to posing a logical, clarifying question in order to verify the actual impact of the legislative amendment.
2024-10-10
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth sitting, plenary session.
The tone is one of concern and explanation, highlighting the existing "confusion" surrounding the issue. The style is relatively logical and fact-based, relying heavily on legal statutes and specific juridical details. The speaker also employs persuasive appeals aimed at preventing the negative public perception that pedophiles are being allowed to work with young people.
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The tone is formal and respectful, whether addressing ministers or colleagues. The style remains largely analytical and procedural, particularly when communicating the specifics of the Legal Committee's deliberations. The preference is for logical arguments and fact-based reporting, rather than emotional appeals.
2024-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, addressing both the Deputy Chairman and the Chancellor of Justice, whom he thanks for bringing people's concerns to the forefront. The tone is serious and concerned, highlighting the "ominous" character of the phrase included in the Chancellor of Justice's report ("nine innocents on the gallows rather than one guilty person in a carriage"). He uses a rhetorical question to direct responsibility toward specific institutions.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is formal, serious, and urgent, emphasizing the complexity and diversity of the threats. It utilizes both logical arguments (structure, salaries, technology) and emotional appeals (referencing credible institutions and the personal attack on the Minister of the Interior). The discourse is comprehensive, encompassing both technological solutions and community involvement.
2024-06-13
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
The style is formal and respectful, addressing the officials directly, while simultaneously conveying concern and urgency regarding consumer protection. The text employs both logical argumentation (the necessity of legislation) and emotional emphasis (avoiding the debt trap and demanding solidarity). The speaker thanks the authorities for their consumer-centric approach and poses detailed questions.
2024-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is questioning and concerned, emphasizing the contrast between the past (great friendship) and the present (contradictory statement). A historical narrative is employed to establish emotional contrast, and there is an appeal to public perception ("people at home are thinking").
2024-06-06
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly formal and procedural, especially when detailing the reporting of the committee's discussion, describing the legal "ping-pong" between the ministry and the Chancellor of Justice. Logical argumentation and a neutral tone are used, focusing on the conveyance of facts and procedural decisions. In the second address, the tone is cautious and practical, focusing on addressing the risk of malicious exploitation.
2024-05-30
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is questioning and analytical, employing a comparison (a home loan versus national debt) to highlight the sheer scale of the topic. The speaker introduces a common, yet potentially naive objection ("what if we have a large debt?"), specifically to elicit an official, expert-backed response.
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is analytical and interrogative, emphasizing logical consistency and procedural errors. It acknowledges the emotional nature of the land tax issue but focuses on explaining the political consequences and historical omissions. The address is formal ("Dear Vice-Chairman! Dear Minister!").
2024-05-16
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
The style is formal and respectful, directly addressing the presenter with the phrases "Dear Manager! Dear Presenter!". The tone is analytical and inquisitive, focusing on finding solutions and setting priorities in the fields of both infrastructure and legislation. The speaker uses logical argumentation, presenting choices (Rail Baltic vs. the acceptance of geography) and examining the efficiency of the state's activities.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly formal, procedural, and informative, focusing on the accurate and neutral conveyance of the content of the Social Affairs Committee session. The discourse is logical and fact-based, including direct quotations and references to the responses provided by the minister and officials. Emotional appeals are absent, and emphasis is placed on consensus-based procedural decisions.
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The address is serious and concerned, highlighting the urgent necessity of resolving social and legal injustice. It describes a situation where the defense of rights is rendered "quite absurd" due to mandatory state fees. The speaker employs both logical arguments (the high cost of litigation) and emotional appeals (faith in the rule of law, the risk of social exclusion). The overall style is formal and respectful, directed toward the presiding officer and colleagues.
2024-05-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is analytical and data-driven, utilizing statistics and historical facts to defend e-voting. The tone is moderately assertive, particularly when criticizing the political motives of opponents and accusing them of polarizing society. The speaker emphasizes logical argumentation, highlighting the complete lack of evidence of electoral fraud throughout the 20-year history.
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is confrontational, forceful, and emotionally charged, emphasizing the security threat. The speaker uses authoritative quotes to establish the gravity of the danger. The address concludes with a direct rhetorical question aimed at casting doubt on the motives and understanding of the situation held by the Riigikogu members supporting the opposing side.
2024-04-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is formal, polite, and analytical, starting with standard parliamentary addresses. The appeal is purely logical and procedural, focusing on the necessity of understanding the consequences of the decision and considering all alternatives. The tone is questioning and demanding, yet non-confrontational.
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly appreciative, empathetic, and constructive, focusing on highlighting positive outcomes and praising the minister. Both logical arguments (the need for flexibility in the labor market) and strong emotional appeals are utilized, emphasizing that "the presence of loved ones is the best cure." The speaker attempts to save time and concentrates more intensely on the most crucial points of the draft bill.
2024-04-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and centered on questions, beginning with implicit criticism concerning the attraction of investments, while expressing hope for the Estonian minister's success. The overall tone is concerned but constructive, focusing on logical arguments regarding the necessity of future planning.
2024-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker adopts an insistent and concerned tone, utilizing emotional analogies (such as protests and the impounding of cars) to underscore the critical importance of the topic. Emphasis is placed on the value of health as "the greatest asset," balancing the emotional appeal with a specific question to the minister regarding systemic change.
2024-02-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, interrogative, and critical, repeatedly employing rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the opposing side's arguments ("Do you not trust people enough with their own choices?"). The tone is logical and focuses on the soundness of the policy, while simultaneously emphasizing a strong belief in the wisdom of the people. The speaker uses comparisons (political parties vs. the Defence Forces) to illustrate their positions.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is predominantly analytical and formal, but it shifts to a passionate tone when criticizing previous project management, which is described as “utterly embarrassing” and inadequate in its handling of taxpayer money. Logical arguments are employed to stress the importance of flexibility, cost savings, and the role of the media. The speaker utilizes rhetorical questions and contrasts (e.g., back door versus parallel door) to clarify their stance.
2024-02-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is emotional and personal, using a narrative (a child, the morning of February 24th, the taste of tears in their mouth) to emphasize the seriousness of the situation. The tone is serious and concerned, balancing personal feeling with the raising of a direct political question regarding humanitarian aid.
2024-02-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting.
The speaker's rhetorical style is analytical, highly detailed, and critical, particularly concerning the activities of banks, yet simultaneously measured when discussing state policy. He/She relies heavily on logical arguments and data, citing statistics from the Bank of Estonia and various analyses. The tone is formal but also incorporates emotional elements, referencing the public outrage and furore that has emerged within society.
2024-01-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and questioning, respectfully addressing the director and the minister. The speaker uses logical argumentation, identifying a specific political conflict (bottom-up vs. centralization) and requesting clarification and considerations from the minister regarding the possibility of centralization.
2024-01-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The language used is formal and respectful, addressing both the chairperson and the presenter. The rhetorical style is primarily logical and question-driven, focusing on clarifying the details of the draft proposal and its practical feasibility. There are no emotional or aggressive elements; the emphasis is on explanation and logical consistency from a health perspective.