Session Profile: Mart Helme

15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session

2025-06-09

Political Position
The political focus is heavily centered on the inadequacy of civilian oversight over state security forces and the practice of mass data retention. He/She strongly opposes the expansion of systems (such as ANTS and facial recognition), especially the retention of data belonging to individuals who have not broken the law. His/Her stance is strongly value-driven and performance-based, underscoring the need for a competent government and a controlled security apparatus. He/She argues that the government is not actually running the country, but remains in office "by the grace of the true masters."

2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in the field of internal security and surveillance systems, referencing ANTS (Automatic Number Plate Recognition System), facial recognition systems, and various camera systems (border security, criminal investigation). They use technical terms such as artificial intelligence and query systems, and emphasize that ministers must be knowledgeable about their respective fields. The speaker draws upon their previous ministerial experience to demonstrate awareness of urban camera footage and the necessity of these systems.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The speaker’s style is extremely aggressive and confrontational, employing personal insults ("incompetent," "Reform Party blathering," "stupid talk") and sarcasm. He/She uses emotional appeals, accusing opponents of incompetence and corruption, and draws examples from popular culture ("Chicago Police Department") to illustrate his/her arguments. The tone is predominantly didactic and condescending, emphasizing his/her previous competence as a minister.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
The speaker is actively participating in the plenary debate, immediately responding to the arguments of previous speakers and requesting additional time. He refers to his previous tenure as Minister of the Interior (2019/2020) to demonstrate his expertise in the field of internal security and camera systems.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is Prime Minister Kristen Michal and the Reform Party, who are accused of incompetence, corruption, and holding office merely by the grace of the country's true leaders. The criticism is intense and personal, referencing Michal's earlier scandals ("plastic bags and white sweaters"). He also criticizes the representative of the Social Democrats (the "Sotsi-boy") for talking utter nonsense.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
Unwillingness to cooperate is evident; the speaker focuses on emphasizing the incompetence of opponents and condemning their actions. He sees the solution in adopting the legislation of foreign countries (more developed nations), rather than in local compromise.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is clearly on national and international themes, addressing matters of Estonian security and legislation (ANTS, PPA). For comparison, he utilizes examples from the United States (specifically the Chicago Police Department) and other developed nations to highlight technological capabilities and legislative deficiencies within Estonia.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Not enough data

2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue is the balance between civil liberties and national security, with the speaker strongly emphasizing the necessity of limiting mass surveillance and data retention. He opposes the implementation of the facial recognition system and questions why data is being stored regarding individuals who have not violated the law.

2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative priority is establishing civilian control over the security agencies, which he deems insufficient and which needs to be addressed through legislation. He stresses the necessity of following the example set by the legislation of "more substantial, more developed" countries and implementing it in Estonia by means of political will.

2 Speeches Analyzed