By Plenary Sessions: Mario Kadastik
Total Sessions: 51
Fully Profiled: 51
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing on the accurate conveyance of the economic commission's discussions and decisions. The speaker employs logical reporting, avoiding emotional appeals and concentrating instead on facts and procedural details (e.g., voting results: 7 votes in favor, 2 against).
2025-10-14
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is highly formal, procedural, and analytical, focusing on a factual summary of the Economic Commission's discussions and consensus decisions. It employs logical appeals, explaining, for instance, the avoidance of duplicating language requirements and the low cost of IT solutions, while strictly avoiding emotional expressions.
2025-10-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
Insufficient data
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is highly formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing on the detailed and chronological reporting of the Economic Committee's sessions. Logical and fact-based arguments are employed, emphasizing dates, decisions, and the substance of the questions and answers. Slight irony or an allusion is discernible at the beginning of the discourse (a reference to the "Reform Party question").
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is highly formal, analytical, and procedural, focusing on the neutral conveyance of the work and decisions of the Economic Commission. The speaker employs logical arguments and data to justify the rejection of the draft bill, emphasizing rationality and potential major losses.
2025-09-23
15th Riigikogu, 6th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is inquisitive, detailed, and logical, focusing on the precise interpretation of regulatory provisions and highlighting potential points for consideration. The tone is neutral and formal, with the objective of finding clarifications for technical and legal definitions.
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
The style is formal, analytical, and procedural, concentrating on the precise description of the commission's debates, dates, and voting outcomes. The argumentation is logical and data-driven, utilizing statistics and references to the historical context of the law (the transposition of the directive). The tone sharpens when the opposing side is labeled a "propaganda theme" aimed solely at attacking Bolt to secure votes.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The style of the discourse is formal, analytical, and critically inquisitive, directly stating that the presentation "caused a lot of confusion" and the claims seemed "a bit strange." The argumentation is purely logical, relying on market data (electricity price differences) to refute the claims presented.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is formal, explanatory, and procedural, focusing on defining the scope of legislative actions and providing legal justification. Logical arguments are employed, clarifying both the provisions and limitations of the draft bill in order to mitigate potential concerns. The tone is moderate, knowledgeable, and authoritative, particularly when speaking as a representative of the lead committee.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The discourse is analytical and corrective, stemming from the necessity of "rearranging things slightly." The emphasis is placed on logical arguments and data, utilizing specific pricing structures and procedural explanations. The tone is formal and centers on the urgency of reducing bureaucracy and accelerating processes.
2025-06-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style is urgent and rational, centered on emphasizing the financial ramifications and delivering a practical solution. An extended, memorable analogy (the expensive, ticking taxi meter) is employed to illustrate the price of indecision and the necessity of a rapid resolution. The tone is persuasive and geared toward action.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical, corrective, and explanatory, focusing on refuting claims presented by others and clarifying specific aspects. The tone is factual and logical, relying heavily on data and explaining market mechanisms (specifically, how the support measure drives the price down). Emotional appeals are absent; the emphasis is placed solely on rational justification.
2025-06-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and focuses on logical arguments and technical details. The speaker poses direct, specific questions to the minister in order to assess the legal resilience of the draft bill and mitigate potential risks. The tone is matter-of-fact and concerned regarding the possible incomplete transposition of the directive.
2025-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The speaker’s style is analytical, measured, and businesslike, focusing on logical arguments and the enumeration of specific government programs. The tone is moderately optimistic, acknowledging challenges (e.g., the high cost of capital, skills shortages) but emphasizing immediately implementable solutions. Specific examples are used (1,400 supported experts), and expert reports are referenced.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The style is highly combative, accusatory, and sharp, focusing on the opponent's (Urmas Reinsalu) systematic dishonesty and distortion of numbers ("lies with a straight face"). Logical appeals and fact-checking are employed, but the tone remains personally critical, demanding that the "rubbish" stop. Illustrative analogies (such as the number of podcast followers) are used to explain statistical manipulation.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The style is confident, corrective, and strongly analytical, focusing heavily on facts and data. The speaker corrects opponents regarding both the bill number and economic data, employing logical arguments to justify the policy. Direct expressions are used (e.g., "making a colossal elephant out of a mosquito") to downplay objections, while generally maintaining a formal tone.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The speaker employs a style that is predominantly argumentative, direct, and combative, focusing on the refutation of opponents' claims (particularly numerical data) and the correction of misconceptions. He utilizes strong logical appeals and technical information, often being sarcastic and dismissive toward his opponents (e.g., citing Urmas Reinsalu's "mental inflation" and "talking nonsense"). He favors arguments grounded in facts and legislation over emotional appeals.
2025-04-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker's style is highly analytical, at times confrontational and demanding, focusing on correcting opponents' factual errors ("almost all the numbers are wrong"). He/She employs strong logical and scientific arguments to refute the opponents' emotional or fear-mongering claims (e.g., dismissing the effect of infrasound as "absurd" and a "nocebo effect"). The overall tone is critical and calls for raising the quality of this nationally important debate, accusing the opponents of "muddying the waters."
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style used when presenting the report is formal and procedural, but it turns sharp and combative when responding to the opposition. The speaker relies on logical, data-driven arguments, accusing opponents of "populism" and "intentional falsehoods," and aggressively refuting their financial forecasts (e.g., 120 million). He employs rhetoric that highlights the opposition's mathematical incompetence and political opportunism.
2025-04-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style of communication is predominantly logical, explanatory, and data-driven, focusing on refuting counter-arguments using specific facts and market regulations. The tone is formal, but occasionally offers personal clarification, especially regarding recurring topics (such as the functioning of the electricity market), even extending an offer for informal discussion to the opposing party.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is corrective and authoritative, aiming to draw attention to misinformation and refute it. The appeal is primarily logical and statutory, focusing on facts and regulations. The address concludes with a direct recommendation to consult the law itself, rather than relying on untrustworthy sources.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly logical, analytical, and data-driven, focusing on debunking myths using physics and scientific literature. The tone is expert and formal, employing complex technical terminology and contrasting scientific rigor with emotional scaremongering ("attempts are made to stir people up based on ignorance"). Simple analogies are used (e.g., climbing stairs, an open car window) to explain scientific phenomena.
2025-03-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The style is analytical, data-driven, and often reactive, responding directly to questions and objections raised by the audience. The tone is predominantly professional, but shifts to assertive and, at times, ideologically contentious, particularly on the subject of cheap fossil fuels. The speaker uses blunt language to counter opponents' arguments, labeling them "hot air" or "false," and rejects the base accusation of being called a "Putinist."
2025-03-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, addressing the Prime Minister directly in the form of a question. The tone is concerned and cautionary, using logical arguments and metaphors (the pendulum, the pyramid) to explain the structure of science and emphasize the consequences of the policy.
2025-01-29
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and informative, focusing on conveying the discussions and decisions of the Economic Committee. The speaker employs logical arguments and references to legal consultations, deliberately avoiding emotional appeals. The tone is substantive and procedural, which is appropriate for the role of a representative of the Steering Committee.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The style is very formal, procedural, and analytical. The speaker focuses on reporting the commission's decisions and explaining technical details, for instance, clarifying the economic inefficiency of the direct line using the example of Lasnamäe. Emotional or value-based appeals are absent; the emphasis is on logic, facts, and procedural correctness.
2024-12-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical and questioning, focusing on the explanation of facts and procedures. The speaker directly poses a question to gain clarity regarding the actual financial impact and consequences of the proposed cut. The tone is formal and logical.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is two-pronged: on tax issues, it is sharp, confrontational, and corrective, starting by labeling opponents' arguments as "nonsense." In legislative submissions, however, the style is extremely formal, detailed, and procedural, focusing on facts, deadlines, and consensus-based decisions. Appeals rely heavily on data and procedural correctness.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing on the detailed reporting of what transpired during the committee meetings. The discourse is logical and fact-based, lacking emotional or persuasive appeals. The objective is to inform the plenary assembly regarding the progress of the proceedings and the committee's consensus decisions.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The style of expression is highly formal, procedural, and analytical, concentrating on the details of the leading committee's work, voting results, and legal interpretation. The tone is explanatory and fact-based, favoring legal and technical specifics over emotional appeals in order to address the opposition's inquiries. It frequently employs references to directives, regulations, and the dates of commission meetings.
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is rational, explanatory, and at times defensive, focusing on refuting misstatements and open questions presented during the discussion. Formal language is employed, and emphasis is placed on logical and fact-based arguments, while paying close attention to procedural accuracy.
2024-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is optimistic, substantive, and persuasive, relying on logical arguments, as well as technological and economic facts. The speaker uses formal language but adds a personal touch, referencing their role in initiating the process more than ten years ago. They strongly urge support for the draft bill in order to realize Estonia's potential.
2024-06-06
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and informative, characteristic of a rapporteur for the lead committee. The address is logically structured, focusing on facts, dates, and procedural steps, while avoiding emotional or personal appeals. The tone is businesslike and goal-oriented, concentrating on providing a detailed description of the second reading process.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is extremely formal, neutral, and informative, characteristic of a committee rapporteur. A logical approach is employed, focusing on facts, dates, and procedural decisions (e.g., 20 amendments, 8 amendments), while strictly avoiding emotional or personal viewpoints.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and rational, focusing on emphasizing the irrationality and unreality of the opposing side's arguments. Strong comparisons (e.g., the totalitarian regime of China) are used to characterize unacceptable control mechanisms.
2024-05-30
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical and inquisitive, focusing on determining specific figures and orders of magnitude. The tone is formal and neutral, aimed at clarifying technical details and obtaining fact-based information from the presenter.
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker’s rhetorical style is formal, logical, and data-driven, focusing on detailed explanations and preempting counterarguments, particularly concerning costs and safety. The tone is optimistic about the technology’s potential and stresses the urgency of making a decision to establish a legal framework. Simplifying analogies (such as the chicken and the egg, or marriage) are employed to clarify complex procedural and ownership issues.
2024-05-16
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
The style is highly professional, analytical, and solution-oriented, highlighting the logical links between the economy, education, and international cooperation. The tone is generally positive and constructive, even while acknowledging the dramatic changes and problems that have occurred in the economy. The speaker supports their arguments using data and specific examples (e.g., studies on the benefits of CERN procurements) and takes additional time to facilitate a meaningful discussion.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal, procedural, and highly detailed, characteristic of a commission representative reporting on the progress of the proceedings. The tone is analytical and neutral when conveying the positions of stakeholders, but becomes firm when addressing obstruction. The arguments are primarily logical, citing legal provisions and the commission's consensus decisions.
2024-05-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, confident, and at times confrontational, especially when questioning the motives of opponents. The appeals are primarily logical and technical, explaining the system's simplicity and contrasting the security of the e-vote with the easy falsifiability of the paper vote (for instance, using the example of a pen with disappearing ink). He/She criticizes the imbalance of the debate and calls it a political ball game.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, informative, and procedural, serving as a neutral transmitter of the Economic Committee's deliberations. The tone is analytical and logical, focusing on a fact-based overview of the bill's contentious issues and the course of proceedings. Emotional appeals are absent; the emphasis is placed on conveying details and explanations.
2024-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is fact-based, analytical, and defensive, focusing on refuting rumors and hypotheses with concrete facts. Logical appeals and technical explanations are used, maintaining a formal and authoritative tone. To emphasize system security, the verifiability of the electoral system is compared to the technology implemented in banking.
2024-04-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is logical, fact-based, and analytical, emphasizing the need to hold an "evidence-based debate" and avoid decisions driven by fear. The tone is simultaneously urgent, criticizing decades of indecision that have harmed Estonia. The speaker employs detailed explanations and temporal frameworks to support their arguments.
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is explanatory, logical, and technically detailed, with the goal of refuting skeptical claims that have been voiced. The tone is matter-of-fact and at times defensive, emphasizing the need for technological literacy to understand the system. Analogies (world banking) and technical facts are used to support the arguments, while avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style of discourse is extremely formal, neutral, and informative. The tone is descriptive and focuses on conveying facts, dates, voting results, and procedural decisions. Emotional appeals are not used; the emphasis is purely on logical and procedural reporting to the full assembly.
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, precise, and analytical, with the objective of "clarifying technical details for the record." The argumentation is purely logical and fact-based, focusing on explaining the technical reality in order to resolve a legal dispute. The tone is neutral and matter-of-fact.
2024-03-07
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is constructive, substantive, and analytical, emphasizing the need for both swift and long-term decisions while criticizing previous indecisiveness. It employs strong logical arguments and temporal forecasts (extending to the year 2100), maintaining a formal tone but also including a brief humorous aside regarding a colleague's comment.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly formal, objective, and informative, focusing on the neutral communication of the committee's work and the content of the draft bill. The speaker employs logical arguments and procedural explanations to justify decisions (e.g., avoiding duplication of effort in the case of EIA [Environmental Impact Assessment]). Emotional appeals are absent; the discourse is focused on the presentation of facts and procedural details.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly businesslike, logical, and explanatory, focusing on facts and procedures (e.g., summaries of committee discussions). It repeatedly uses procedural remarks and clarifications to delineate its scope of responsibility ("Putting a disclaimer first," "this was not discussed in the committee"). The tone is concerned about the climate crisis but pragmatic when it comes to offering solutions.
2024-02-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly formal, neutral, and objective, which is typical for a committee rapporteur. The address is detailed and logical, focusing exclusively on the summaries of questions, answers, and decisions presented during the committee session. Emotional or personal assessments are absent; the emphasis is placed on procedural transparency.
2024-01-23
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, respectful, and analytical, beginning with an address to the Chairman and the Prime Minister and offering thanks for the speech. The argumentation is logical and focuses on the structural details of the policy (the components of the funding), while strictly avoiding emotional appeals.