Session Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
2024-03-11
Political Position
The political platform is fiercely anti-government, focusing on the decline in economic security for families and the cynicism inherent in the government's policies (the green transition, involvement in conflict). The government's contradictory approach to trade with Russia is sharply highlighted, as is the detrimental impact of the proposed car tax. The overall stance is highly critical, stressing that the government is taking money away from vulnerable groups.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates awareness of the rising costs of social services, particularly childcare services, and possesses specific data regarding job offers mediated by the Unemployment Insurance Fund (Töötukassa) directed towards Russia. Furthermore, the speaker is familiar with the objectives of the proposed car tax bill and the justifications presented by the government (e.g., 3% of car owners giving up their vehicles). Detailed procedural criticism is also presented concerning the relevance of the Prime Minister's responses to the topic at hand.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharply confrontational and accusatory, employing emotional appeals (intimidation, cynicism) to criticize the government's actions. Direct rhetorical questions are posed to the prime minister ("Why are you doing this?"), and emphasis is placed on the government's alleged inconsistency and dishonesty. The tone is more emotional and accusatory than data-driven, focusing instead on the political impact on people's lives.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is highly active during plenary sessions, directing pointed questions to the Prime Minister and other ministers through parliamentary inquiries. This pattern of activity demonstrates a focus on exposing the inconsistencies between the government's actions and its political rhetoric.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is Prime Minister Kaja Kallas and the government, who are criticized for political inconsistency and dishonesty. The criticism is intense, accusing the government of frightening families (with war and climate issues) and encroaching on private property (the car tax). The opposition is both policy-based (the car tax, trade with Russia) and procedural (inconsistency in their responses).
5 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Insufficient data. All the statements presented are directed toward criticism of the government and questions.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The regional focus covers Tallinn districts (the cost of childcare services, frightening art) and strongly highlights the problems in rural areas. Specifically, it is stressed that the car tax and the lack of public transport make mobility for families with children in rural areas impossible.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic views are strongly opposed to taxation, particularly regarding property taxes (such as the proposed car tax), which would force vulnerable families to divest assets. Government spending (on the green transition and military efforts) is criticized, and there is fear of future cuts to family services. It calls for state institutions to align their policies with the government's position regarding the termination of trade with Russia.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
At the core of social issues are the sense of security for families, the rising cost of childcare services, and the economic vulnerability of large families. The government is criticized for frightening young people and women with talk of war and climate change, which allegedly negatively impacts the desire to have children. The need to ensure stability and mobility for families is emphasized.
5 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
Legislative focus is currently centered on opposing the proposed car tax bill, highlighting the negative impact it would have on families with children and rural regions. The discussion also addresses the inefficiency of the mobility reform and its failure to adequately assist residents in rural areas.
5 Speeches Analyzed