Session Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
2024-03-05
Political Position
The political position is strongly oppositional, focusing on criticizing the government's inaction and inefficiency, especially regarding the education strategy. The main points of opposition are related to the closure of rural schools, the subsidization of renewable energy, and taxes that burden rural residents (the car tax). The criticism is sharp, accusing the government of ideological market distortion and engaging in verbal sleight of hand.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in education policy (the standard of rural schools, the impact of their closure) and the energy sector, particularly regarding the economic viability of renewables and their global environmental impact. Economic and technical terms, such as "market distortion," are employed, and reference is made to the role of CO2 in plant nutrition, while presenting detailed objections to the preferential development of renewable energy.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is combative and sharply critical, often employing rhetorical questions and powerful metaphors ("pyramid scheme," "verbal sleight of hand"). It appeals to logic and common sense ("people of sound mind will understand"), stressing the hypocrisy and lack of substance in the opposing side's arguments. The tone is formal, yet emotionally charged.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker was very active during the plenary session that day, repeatedly raising questions and offering comments concerning the education strategy, the energy directive, and procedural matters alike. This indicates active involvement in the debates and a readiness to engage with numerous topical issues.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The primary opposition is aimed at the ministers and government bills, which are sharply criticized regarding both their content and their procedure. The criticism is intense, accusing the government of destroying rural life and engaging in ideological activities that are detrimental to the economy. Separately, the Riigikogu Board is criticized for its lack of procedural oversight.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
There is no information regarding willingness to cooperate or compromise. Although the colleague’s (Evelin Poolamets) previous question is mentioned, it is only used to highlight a procedural deficiency and demand the suspension of the bill’s reading.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
There is a strong regional focus on rural areas and rural schools. It is emphasized that the depopulation of rural areas harms the whole of Estonia, and the achievements of a student from Metsküla School are cited as an example to counter the policy of closures. The difficulty of life for rural residents is also linked to the car tax.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views are strongly pro-market, opposing ideological market distortions and subsidies. The prioritized development of renewable energy is regarded as a "pyramid scheme" that drains funds without delivering economic growth or prosperity. They also oppose new taxes that place a burden on rural residents.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social theme addressed is the accessibility and quality of education in rural areas. Emphasis is placed on the need to invest in rural schools to ensure equal opportunities for entering higher education and to prevent the depopulation of rural areas. The climate crisis narrative is viewed skeptically, with CO2 being considered food for plants.
6 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus centers on challenging draft legislation related to the education strategy (specifically, the closure of rural schools) and the transposition of the Renewable Energy Directive. Furthermore, there is an emphasis on procedural integrity, demanding that the reading of the draft bill be suspended because a crucial stakeholder engagement process was overlooked.
6 Speeches Analyzed