By Months: Mait Klaassen
Total Months: 15
Fully Profiled: 15
10.2025
3 Speeches
Klaassen’s rhetorical style is predominantly formal, neutral, and procedural, especially when reporting on the committee’s work before the Riigikogu. He relies on logical arguments and facts, employing specific legislative terminology (e.g., "by consensus," "the issues surrounding infringement proceedings"). His tone is analytical and focuses on conveying content, rather than making emotional appeals.
09.2025
8 Speeches
The speaker's style is formal, polite, and inquisitive, addressing respected officials (the Chancellor of Justice, the bank president, the minister). They employ a logical appeal, highlighting procedural shortcomings and statistical inequality. The tone is concerned, particularly regarding the polarization of society and the lagging development of rural areas, and is focused on finding solutions.
06.2025
4 Speeches
The speaking style is formal and polite ("Thank you, esteemed Chairman!"), but simultaneously critically questioning, focusing on details and the rationale behind the decisions. The speaker employs logical appeals and personal background ("as a former education professional") as well as anecdotal examples (the 13/0 exam result) to enhance the weight of the arguments.
03.2025
3 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on the presentation of concrete and substantive questions to the Prime Minister and the rapporteur. The tone is concerned and demanding, particularly when the value of the presented data regarding border crossers is questioned without proper background analysis. The speaker employs a logical appeal, referencing previous agreements and international law.
02.2025
2 Speeches
The style is formal and question-focused, utilizing courteous forms of address ("respected chairman," "dear minister"). The rhetoric is analytical and logical, presenting hypothetical scenarios (the use of force against a vessel) and demanding clarification regarding the scope of the regulations. The tone is concerned, particularly regarding the dispatch of potentially dangerous vessels to neighboring countries.
01.2025
1 Speeches
The style is formal and respectful, addressing the manager and the presenter using polite titles. The rhetoric is directed toward posing a specific, technical question, based on assumptions regarding the wolf's learned behavior. The tone is primarily logical and information-seeking, although it also includes a personal emotional connection to the subject matter.
12.2024
25 Speeches
The speaker's style is predominantly formal, technical, and explanatory, which is typical for a legislative rapporteur. The tone is patient and detailed, particularly when addressing questions concerning the motor vehicle tax and procedures for deregistration. He/She employs logical arguments to defend the necessity of the draft legislation and minimize legal interference, while simultaneously maintaining a defensive posture regarding the opposition's criticism.
11.2024
3 Speeches
The rhetorical style is analytical and incisive, stressing the danger of inaction that leads to the "black earth." Logical arguments are employed, and authorities are referenced, citing one "very beloved statesman." The speaker primarily presents their positions in the form of questions designed to generate specific solutions.
09.2024
5 Speeches
The speaker’s style is predominantly formal, procedural, and informative, typical of a steering committee representative who delivers summaries of discussions. The presentation utilizes logical arguments and detailed references to officials' responses, deliberately avoiding emotional appeals. While addressing the Minister, appreciation is voiced for his enthusiasm; conversely, the question directed to the Chancellor of Justice regarding the inviolability of the home is serious and rights-focused.
06.2024
2 Speeches
The speaking style is formal and respectful, deferentially addressing both the session chairman, the Chancellor of Justice, and the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. The politician employs both emotional support ("finally!") and systemic, analytical questions concerning education and curricula. He emphasizes the value of honesty when evaluating presentations ("I stress: for an honest presentation").
05.2024
3 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, always addressing the presenters with deference ("esteemed," "dear professor"). However, the tone regarding budget issues is worried and urgent, asking at what time the catastrophe will occur if no action is taken. He/She poses complex, two-part questions that target both the legal and economic consequences.
04.2024
5 Speeches
The style is formal, expert, and concerned, emphasizing the seriousness and long-term nature of the problem. The speaker employs both logical arguments (comparing costs with human medicine, statistics) and emotional elements (referencing the high suicide rate and the detachment of young people from nature). He/she is detailed and explanatory, addressing both colleagues and the wider public.
03.2024
4 Speeches
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on asking direct questions and referencing shortcomings in the data. The tone is critical yet respectful ("Honorable Minister," "Dear Presenter"), emphasizing logical reasoning and a long-term perspective. When tackling social issues, a personal example (three children and nine grandchildren) is employed to establish credibility.
02.2024
2 Speeches
The style is formal and deferential, utilizing parliamentary addresses ("respected Chair of the session"). The speaker relies on logical arguments and personal institutional experience, frequently posing rhetorical questions to challenge the opposing side's optimism and underlying assumptions. The tone is analytical, but in the second speech, it becomes slightly frustrated, as the speaker cannot comprehend the opposing side's optimism during the course of the discussion.
01.2024
2 Speeches
The style is formal and analytical, employing logical argumentation and references to scientific principles. The tone is appreciative in the first speech, but shifts to being direct and corrective in the second, particularly when the opposing side's claims are disputed due to their disregard for the laws of physics. A fact- and science-based approach dominates instead of emotional appeals.