By Plenary Sessions: Jaanus Karilaid
Total Sessions: 44
Fully Profiled: 44
2025-11-11
XV Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is predominantly analytical and procedural, given that this is a commission report, but it also includes sharp criticism directed at the government. Logical arguments are employed, highlighting the necessity of the draft bill and the government's peculiar behavior concerning the security report. The introduction features an acknowledgment of a political competitor (Ando), which suggests a certain degree of conciliatory tone.
2025-11-05
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
The rhetorical style is combative, direct, and critical, accusing the Prime Minister of avoiding topics and possessing an "astonishing ability to reinvent herself." The argumentation relies on data and logical appeals (the audit results), but simultaneously employs sharp language to call the Prime Minister's credibility into question ("Surely the Prime Minister cannot just be throwing words around").
2025-10-22
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
The rhetorical style is extremely confrontational, critical, and accusatory, particularly directed at Finance Minister Jürgen Ligi, who is accused of narcissism and dogmatism. Strong emotional expressions are used ("disorder," "we are languishing," "ruin/destruction"), and there are repeated demands for self-criticism and the correction of policies. The appeals are grounded in the message delivered by the voters (the results of the local elections).
2025-09-08
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The style is initially critical of the political culture (criticizing the practice of finger-pointing), but subsequently shifts to an analytical tone, emphasizing the recurring gap between election promises and reality. Finally, the style becomes highly constructive and pragmatic, making a public proposal to the minister for specific cooperation and the organization of a visit. The speaker also acknowledges the higher political style (Mr. Kivimägi, Chairman of the Session).
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is critical and urgent, employing strong assessments to describe the government's policy ("indifferent, fragmented, and chaotic"). A logical appeal is utilized, directly connecting the energy deficit with the absence of economic prosperity. The speech aims to raise substantive questions and demand solutions so that political slogans do not remain hollow.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is militant and assertive, criticizing opponents for their profound dogmas and the embarrassing ostentatious display of canonical law. The speaker employs both logical arguments (legal foundation, analysis) and emotional appeals, highlighting the Moscow Patriarch's actions in declaring the war in Ukraine sacred and legitimizing the act of killing.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is direct, analytical, and demanding, posing sharp questions to the minister regarding specific policies. The argumentation relies on logical appeals, referencing existing analyses and "real life," and utilizes historical context (the Ratas/Aab policy) to criticize the current situation.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and question-oriented. The speaker employs a logical and structured approach, sequentially posing three specific questions (resources, cost, partners) to gather factual information. Emotional or narrative appeals are absent.
2025-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is predominantly critical and urgent, blending statistical data (a 10% rise in crime) with emotional appeals that highlight the suffering and loss of honor experienced by families victimized by lengthy court proceedings. It employs a contrasting approach, pitting the perspective of the prosecutor and the judge against the viewpoint of the citizen, which is invariably critical. It demands concrete action plans from the government, rather than merely identifying problems, and repeatedly requests additional time to present its arguments.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is polite and formal, respectfully addressing both the chairman and the presenter. The speech is logical and strictly focuses on the details of the draft resolution, presenting clear and specific questions without emotional appeals.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, information briefing
The tone of the address is critical, demanding, and at times accusatory, particularly aimed at the Prime Minister, who stands accused of failing to answer questions. Logical appeals are employed, highlighting economic consequences (specifically, hindering job and income creation) alongside emotionally charged expressions like "a very, very painful problem" and comparing the situation to the US-Mexico border.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is persuasive, insistent, and confrontational, emphasizing both logical security arguments and emotional appeals (historical right and justice). The language is formal and direct, including a sharp warning to opponents who act contrary to national interests. Accusing opponents of spreading misinformation lends a moralizing and polarizing shade to the speech's tone.
2025-03-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is persuasive, direct, and at times urgent, employing strong security warnings and historical parallels (Soviet occupation, fascist motifs). The speaker uses rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the opponents' motives ("Who benefits from this?") and contrasts his own positions with the spreading of "malicious falsehoods." He begins the speech with rare and effusive praise for the Social Democrats, subsequently establishing a unified, pro-security tone.
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is critical and exacting, focusing on acknowledging the government's failures in energy policy and criticizing the legacy of the previous administration. A formal tone is employed, and the argumentation relies on logic, citing economic stagnation and specific data regarding pricing and investments.
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is urgent, idealistic, and persuasive, employing strong moral and value-based language (e.g., defining citizenship as a "good and a privilege"). The speaker utilizes metaphors ("half measure," "full measure") and stresses the value of time (one month) and resources. The text concludes with an optimistic and "positively idealistic" call for achieving parliamentary unity.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is analytical and inquiry-focused, aiming to highlight the contradictions and negative impact of the policy. The tone is formal and respectful (when addressing the Chair and the presenter), employing logical appeals that focus on the justifications for the tax and the details of the budget.
2025-01-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and urgent, highlighting the extensive shortcomings and confusion surrounding the government's actions. Strong negative phrases are employed ("total crisis," "political dogma," "cacophonous tax hike"), and the appeal relies on logic and facts (lack of competence, specific financial figures). The tone is formal, yet sharp.
2025-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp, demanding, and critical, characterizing the minister's activities as "just hot air" and "empty rhetoric." The speaker contrasts this rhetorical posturing with real steps and decisions, demanding concrete answers regarding the actions taken over the last month or two. The tone is impatient and emphasizes the urgent need to act immediately.
2024-12-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is combative and critical, employing strong negative assessments such as "absurdly" and "as a waste of money." The speaker contrasts the government's powerful rhetoric with the actual outcomes ("the result is, naturally, zero"), thereby highlighting political inefficiency. The appeals themselves are a blend of logical arguments (that existing structures are sufficient) and emotional frustration concerning regional inequality.
2024-12-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and interrogative, focusing on facts and details. The tone is neutral and logical, with the aim of obtaining specific financial data from the presenter. Emotional or narrative elements are not used.
2024-12-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and urgent, utilizing strong emotional and evaluative expressions (e.g., "extremely hypocritical, extremely deceitful, hollow," "tax chaos"). The speaker contrasts the minister's rhetorical confidence with the actual political decisions (cuts) and repeatedly uses rhetorical questions to undermine the opponent's position. The appeals are primarily logical, relying on the link between policy and crime indicators.
2024-12-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the speaker with a request to clarify the legal options ("Please, enlighten me"). The tone is serious and concerned, focusing on a logical appeal by presenting a concrete scenario of a systemic attack (it attacks the state, language, and mind, and proceeds to court).
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is interrogative and analytical, focusing on challenging the opponents' vague claims (e.g., security threat) and demanding practical clarity. The speaker employs logical arguments, such as mentioning the double privileges enjoyed by gray passport holders (EU and Russian Federation), and presents their questions directly and formally.
2024-11-18
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, highly charged, and demanding, accusing the Prime Minister of losing internal stability and clarity. Strong metaphors and loaded judgments are employed, such as "tax chaos," "regression," "social democrat dictate," and "political fog and obfuscation." The speaker demands concrete facts and figures, contrasting them with the government's generalized evasiveness, and is direct and confrontational within the formal parliamentary setting.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, combative, and forceful, highlighting the government's indifference ("they don't care"). Rhetorical questions and contrasts are employed (e.g., "the world's best finance minister" versus "a non-transparent budget") to undermine the government's credibility. The speaker uses numerous negative adjectives (confusing, incomprehensible, illogical) and appeals to the diminishing sense of security.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The tone is extremely confrontational, accusatory, and sharply critical, employing strong characterizations such as "somewhat hollow," "hypocritical," and "a security threat to Estonia." The appeals are primarily emotional and politically charged, stressing the opponents' incompetence and inability to read society. The speech is direct and formally characteristic of a parliamentary address.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and demanding, emphasizing the urgency of addressing both inaction and broken promises. Figurative expressions are employed, such as "passing the hot potato," to describe how government agencies shirk responsibility. The speaker uses rhetorical questions and appeals to national principles, setting them in stark contrast to the government's convenience.
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and condemnatory, employing strong negative metaphors (e.g., "tax chaos," "headless state," "inflation galloping like a horse"). The speaker contrasts the government's misleading term, "tax festival," with the actual situation, which is characterized by "unmanageability" and "flailing." The tone is emotionally charged, accusing the government of neglecting the welfare of the people.
2024-09-18
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is critical, demanding, and at times sharp, especially concerning the Prime Minister's responses, which are referred to as "evasive." Direct questions and phrases are employed (e.g., "tax festival"), and there is an effort to compel the government to provide concrete answers instead of abstract promises.
2024-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The speaker's rhetorical style is critical, analytical, and incisive, combining legal argumentation (legal certainty, constitutionality) with strong political accusations. The tone is formal, yet it contains intense accusations directed at the government, labeling their conduct as contrary to the spirit of the constitution. He uses figurative expressions such as "as an ominous threat" and "chaotic tax festival."
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, directed at a member of the Government of the Republic during a session of the Riigikogu. It employs references to "confusion" and "rebirth" concerning the stated positions, which lends the tone a subtle critical undertone while simultaneously demanding legally precise argumentation.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and critical, employing strong emotional language such as "partisan arrogance" and "stifling the economy." Irony is utilized, particularly in connecting family benefits to the car tax, and there are references to the internal disagreements within the Reform Party. The discourse is formal but includes sharp descriptions concerning the government members' inability to self-critique.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and demanding, focusing on the shortcomings and incompetence evident in the prime ministerial candidate's opening address. Rhetorical questions and emotional appeals (e.g., injustice) are employed to underscore the lack of accountability and the gravity of the issues. The tone is formal, yet sharply confrontational in its substance.
2024-06-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, additional plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative and forceful, utilizing rhetorical questions and emotional interjections ("oppa!"). The speaker highlights the logical contradiction between the handling of a minor draft bill and the widespread financial and political chaos. The tone is formal, yet it includes strong criticism and demands.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The style is direct, analytical, and interrogative, utilizing rhetorical questions to expose and understand the opposing side's logic. The speaker substantiates their arguments by relying on specific sources (an ERR news report) and previous political decisions, maintaining a critical tone while avoiding personal attacks.
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, highlighting the government's lack of vision and poor work culture. Although logical and evidence-based arguments are presented (referencing explanatory notes and guidelines), the tone is emotionally charged, especially concerning economic uncertainty. Figurative language is employed, accusing the government of dishonesty and the state's long arm reaching into people's pockets.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is demanding and critical, emphasizing the need for logical argumentation and highlighting the absence of practical examples to justify the draft bill. The tone is formal and analytical, demanding that the issues be spelled out clearly and unambiguously. Ultimately, the style becomes sharply confrontational, characterizing the legislative process as a "peculiar stage."
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, third sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and deeply concerned, employing judgments such as "shamefully little" and "negative bureaucracy." The speaker relies both on logical arguments (referencing Madis Kallas’s statements and the coalition agreement) and on emotional indictments of the government’s indifference. The questions are direct and posed as a challenge to the prime minister’s inaction.
2024-04-03
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is urgent and critical, leveling accusations against the minister for indecisiveness and fear regarding Russia's reaction. It employs strong contrasts (pitting the invocation of church fathers against the fear of Russia) and rhetorical questions, demanding swift action and the introduction of legislative amendments even before Midsummer's Day. The tone is predominantly confrontational and demanding, cautioning against political uproar that might escalate into a security threat.
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is formal, procedural, and fact-based, utilizing a chronological narrative to present the issue. The tone is inquisitive and demanding, focusing on a logical structure that emphasizes that all prerequisites for the project's completion have been met, yet the result is missing. The ultimate goal is to obtain explanations and justifications from the minister.
2024-02-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetoric is combative and accusatory, centered on exposing the government's failures and highlighting its hypocrisy. Strong emotional appeals are employed, referencing the prime minister's displeasure and the public's "whining about poverty." The speaker backs up their criticism with specific quotes and alleged inside information.
2024-02-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive and critical, accusing the government of failure, dishonesty, and a lack of proper analysis. Direct speech and strong phrases are employed ("you're playing dumb," "you had to lie to the people"), and challenges are posed to the minister's self-confidence. The appeal itself is a blend of logical argumentation concerning economic indicators and emotional accusations regarding dishonesty.
2024-02-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and procedural, concentrating on justifying both the substance of the inquiry and the rationale for its current relevance. The tone is analytical, emphasizing the shift in facts (original knowledge versus current knowledge) with the goal of obtaining specific answers from the minister. The speech is brief and straightforward.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and at times emotional, employing strong expressions such as "strikingly different" and accusing the government of lying. The speaker balances procedural criticism (impact assessments, the coordination instrument) with moral accusations regarding the decline of political culture. He uses a rhetorical question (why comments are made instead of simply refusing coordination) and requests additional time, which underscores the importance of the topic to him.