Session Profile: Helle-Moonika Helme

The political focus centers on the transparency of national defense funding and criticism leveled against the government's performance. The speaker vehemently opposes the management of the Ministry of Defence's 5 billion euro budget, citing corruption ("rats in the pantry") and referencing the State Audit Office report. Emphasis is also placed on public anger stemming from tax hikes and the government's tendency to label or stigmatize opponents, which ultimately diminishes the public's will to defend the country. This stance is fiercely oppositional and primarily targets the inefficiency of the government's operations.

The speaker demonstrates specific knowledge of the national defense budget figures and the procurement timeline (€5 billion between 2022 and 2029). This expertise is also evident in their ability to use official documents (such as the National Audit Office report and transcripts) to verify and substantiate political claims. Furthermore, they possess knowledge regarding the demographic challenges facing conscription (the declining number of young men).

The rhetorical style is sharply confrontational and accusatory, employing emotional imagery ("rats in the pantry") and hyperbole (mandatory service for women). The speaker quotes classical sources and demands strict factual accuracy regarding procedural issues, ready to produce official protocols (the transcript). The tone is generally admonishing and demanding.

The data indicates active participation in the plenary session, repeatedly posing questions and raising points of order. The speaker's interventions are well-timed and focus on demanding immediate accountability from the minister and the presiding officer.

The primary opposition is aimed at the government and the Ministry of Defense, who stand accused of wasting public funds and dishonesty. The criticism is intense, covering both political substance (the reduction of defense readiness) and procedural specifics (demanding that the minister and the head acknowledge their mistakes). There is no sign of a willingness to compromise; instead, the rectification of the opponents' errors is being demanded.

There is not enough data.

The focus is exclusively on national topics, such as the defense budget and the organization of mandatory military service. There is no regional or local focus; only the general public’s widespread discontent is mentioned.

Economic viewpoints are sharply critical of current fiscal policy, opposing tax hikes and new levies that fuel public discontent. Strict accountability is demanded regarding the use of public funds, especially concerning the Ministry of Defense's 5 billion euro budget, hinting at financial impropriety.

Social issues related to compulsory military service are being addressed, noting the decreasing number of young men available. The question of plans for mandatory military service for women is being raised, expressing an extremely negative and worried attitude toward the idea ("Are we going to kill Estonian women in the war too?").

The primary focus is on overseeing and ensuring the accountability of government actions, particularly concerning the management of the Ministry of Defense budget. The speaker operates as a critical opponent and watchdog, demanding clarification regarding existing budgetary decisions and potential new policies (mandatory service for women).