By Plenary Sessions: Leo Kunnas
Total Sessions: 54
Fully Profiled: 54
2025-11-05
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The speaking style is formal and procedural, focusing on reporting the decisions and procedural flow of the steering committee. The tone is moderate and cautious, especially in legal disputes (concerning constitutionality), where the speaker admits their lack of competence. They employ a logical appeal, relying on facts (dates, consensus decisions), and refuse emotional debate with the opponent.
2025-10-21
15th Riigikogu, Sixth Session, Plenary Sitting
Insufficient data
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is highly formal, factual, and procedural, focusing on the presentation of the draft bill and the reporting of the work conducted by the National Defence Committee. The tone is neutral and authoritative, relying on logical arguments, legal statutes, and consensus-based decisions, while avoiding emotional appeals.
2025-09-15
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is insistent, critical, and concerned, highlighting the failure and lack of benefit of current policy. Logical arguments and simple mathematical calculations regarding economic sustainability are employed, warning that the country will not withstand the defense spending marathon for long. The speech is formal yet emotionally charged, utilizing strong comparisons with Latvia and Lithuania.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The speaker's rhetorical style is formal, factual, and focused on clarification, addressing the session chair and the minister directly. Logical arguments and procedural facts are utilized to explain the current status of the legislation, while avoiding emotional appeals. The tone is neutral and informative.
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and confrontational, employing pointed rhetorical questions to highlight the substantive failure of the reporting. The tone is formal and centers on logical inconsistency: the presentation addresses "completely different things" than the strategy itself. Logical argumentation, rather than emotional appeals, is utilized to call the value of the strategy into question.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is formal, factual, and often insistent, particularly on national defense topics, emphasizing the urgency of the issues. In the role of the opposition, the tone is protestive and demanding, criticizing the government's inaction and the stalling of parliamentary inquiries. The appeals are primarily logical and policy-based, focusing on demanding specific solutions and timelines.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal (when addressing the chairman of the session and the minister) and concerned, posing a critical question. Logical argumentation is used, emphasizing the security threat and the lack of practical work, in order to highlight the perilous nature of the decision.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is serious, analytical, and heavily argumentative, focusing on logical appeals and factual evidence concerning military operations. The speaker employs historical examples (Cambodia, the actions of Princess Diana) to counter opposing arguments and stresses the urgent necessity of providing military personnel with all the resources required to repel aggression. He requested additional time to extend his address.
2025-06-02
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing both the Chair of the session and the Minister. This is a direct, fact-based question that continues the topic initiated by a colleague, maintaining a neutral and procedural tone.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The tone is hostile and critical, posing a direct question that calls the minister's previous explanation into question. Irony or sarcasm is employed, referencing the "dictator neighbor's" differing tax policy towards neighboring countries.
2025-05-19
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is formal, logic-driven, and directly interrogative. The speaker utilizes data and statistics (e.g., a 7% decline in productivity) to establish a clear contradiction between the minister's positive rhetoric and the actual reality. The tone is critical and demands an explanation of how these two conflicting facts can possibly be reconciled.
2025-03-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly formal, informative, and neutral, focusing on the clarification of legal facts. Emotional or narrative elements are absent; the objective is to provide a specific and authoritative response to the preceding discussion. The address is concluded briefly and resolutely: "There is no question."
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, factual, and resolute, balancing the acknowledgment of a colleague's good initiative with a technically justified rejection. He/She employs direct criticism toward the executive power ("slept on," "work undone") and emphasizes the importance of logical arguments and procedural correctness.
2025-03-17
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, critical, and concerned, using rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the rationality and long-term viability of government policy. The appeals are logical, focusing on the limits of capacity and the lack of competitiveness, while avoiding emotional exaggerations.
2025-02-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and insistent, emphasizing the need to increase defense spending driven by the current security situation. The speaker employs logical argumentation, referencing specific goals and international demands (Donald Trump), to pose a comprehensive political question to the minister. The tone is interrogative and challenging.
2025-01-30
Fifteenth Estonian Parliament, fifth session, plenary session.
The tone is serious, concerned, and pragmatic, focusing on security threats and the need for legislation. The speaker uses logical arguments and simple, emotionally impactful examples (a state traitor, a 70-year-old acting as a fire spotter) and begins the speech with an apology for a previous absence and a miscalculation. He strives to be specific and time-efficient.
2025-01-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and direct, emphasizing the urgency of the situation concerning the increase in defense spending. The speaker employs a logical comparison with neighboring countries to pose a challenging question regarding Estonia's capacity to solve the problem. The tone is formal, addressing the session chair and a specific colleague ("Dear Urmas").
2025-01-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal (addressing the session chairman and the minister), but the tone is extremely urgent and critical. Strongly emotionally charged terms, such as "catastrophe," are used to describe the situation. The speaker presents their criticism in a structured manner, demanding a specific, quantifiable assessment of the government's actions.
2024-12-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical, concerned, and direct, posing a question to the Minister regarding the scope of research into analogous cases. Logical appeals are employed, emphasizing that disasters which have occurred elsewhere predict similar consequences in Estonia, and the tone is cautionary.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, procedural, and deeply analytical, concentrating on the details and procedures of the bill. The speaker uses logical arguments and theoretical constructions (e.g., the China-Taiwan scenario) to answer questions, while simultaneously acknowledging the turbulence of the current security situation. The tone is measured and cautious, stressing that major decisions must reach the great hall.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is analytical, logical, and strongly critical, focusing on both procedural and substantive errors. It uses specific examples and statistical data (e.g., defense budget metrics and percentages) to support arguments, demonstrating the system's inefficiency. The tone is factual, yet it expresses concern regarding the nation's strategic management decisions and the overall security situation.
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is serious, firm, and direct, emphasizing the "moral or ethical divide" that exists in society. Both moral appeal (the framework of killing) and logical reasoning (reference to DNA) are employed to support a value-based position.
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly formal, informative, and procedural, focusing on the substance of the draft bill and the course of the proceedings. The tone is serious and measured, emphasizing the gravity of the current global situation. The speaker relies on logical arguments, citing laws, previous practices, and the consensus decisions of the commission.
2024-10-21
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical, formal, and forceful, particularly concerning the war in Ukraine, where strategic advice is provided. Logical arguments and data-driven criticism are employed, emphasizing that the war cannot be won using existing methods. The tone is direct and authoritative, addressing the minister with questions and proposals.
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical, serious, and cautionary, emphasizing the historical context and factual shortcomings. It employs critical irony, placing the term "affordable national defense" in quotation marks to underscore its inadequacy. The argumentation is primarily logical and fact-based, focusing on the persistence of the threat landscape and new international requirements.
2024-09-24
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, addressing the chair of the session and the minister directly. A direct and logical manner of questioning is employed, avoiding emotional appeals. The tone is neutral and focuses on clarifying the facts.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The style of the address is analytical and constructive, emphasizing the necessity of moving forward in comprehensive national defense. Rhetorical questions are employed to draw attention to past inaction and the requirement for independent action. The overall tone is formal and logical, focusing on the political substance and the future resolution of technical details.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, focusing on logical and technical details. The speaker addresses the presenter politely ("Dear Lauri") and poses a series of specific, structure-related questions, avoiding emotional or narrative elements.
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on logical arguments and statistical data. The tone is critical regarding structural problems ("I myself have been very critical"), but the address to the recipient ("Dear Hanno") is polite and is framed as a solution-seeking question.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, straightforward, and analytical, focusing on the demand for specific data and details. The speaker employs logical appeals, posing questions about exact percentages and sums, while strictly avoiding emotional or personal attacks.
2024-06-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and appropriately urgent, focusing on logical arguments and strategic necessity. The speaker presents their views in a structured manner, posing five detailed questions and utilizing both historical examples and concrete facts (e.g., Poland's 2.3 billion investment). The tone is predominantly controlled, but also includes a positive remark regarding the effectiveness of a previous question.
2024-06-04
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, concise, and businesslike, making it appropriate for the Vice-Chair of the committee to comment to the plenary. The tone is predominantly procedural and realistic, particularly concerning the National Broadcasting Corporation's expected reaction to being designated a vital service provider.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The tone is professional and analytical, yet insistent and concerned when addressing security matters, stressing that the current security situation necessitates finding solutions. He employs logical arguments (precedents, the availability of warehouse space) and specific comparisons (a 0:4 score in the defense industry). He frankly admits that the political climate for adopting the necessary decisions (requiring 51 supporting votes) is not yet mature, but that it is inevitable.
2024-05-27
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is serious and formal, employing powerful historical parallels (the Nazi regime, the Soviet Union) to underscore the moral and existential gravity of the argument. The speaker adopts a critical and bewildered tone, questioning why the basic concepts remain incomprehensible.
2024-05-16
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
The style is formal and respectful, with the speaker politely addressing the session chair and the rapporteur. The speaker employs a logical and simplified hypothetical example (the production of trinitrotoluene/TNT) to raise a specific, procedural question concerning the initial steps required to launch large-scale manufacturing. The tone is investigative and practical.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is serious, logical, and compelling, focusing on justifying the proposed legal amendment by citing specific security risks and operational necessities. The speaker employs hypothetical scenarios (such as the threat of armed internal conflict) to underscore the danger, all while maintaining a formal, fact-based approach. Finally, he points out systemic inertia, which is preventing the rapid adoption of these necessary changes.
2024-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The speech is formal and respectful, employing standard forms of address ("Honorable Chairman of the Session! Dear Minister!"). The rhetoric utilizes personal background (originating from Kliima village in Võru municipality) to justify the presentation of a regional issue, thereby balancing the personal and official approaches.
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is polite and formal, addressing the rapporteur directly and respectfully. It primarily uses questions to gain clarity regarding the legislative process (how the improved text was reached) and the possibilities for achieving the desired political goals. The tone is analytical and constructive, praising positive developments.
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, particularly concerning the actions of the commission that qualified the proposed amendments as insincere. Powerful historical analogies (KGB Captain Ilyashevich, a quote from Stalin) are employed to underscore the lack of trustworthiness. Logical argumentation (a detailed list of specific paragraphs and points) is combined with emotional appeal (by drawing associations with Russian political practice).
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The speech is analytical, formal, and cautionary, stressing the danger of financial crises. The style is logical, relying on historical facts and numerical data (e.g., the weight of an ounce, the rise in the price of gold). The speaker uses an urgent tone, calling for preparation for the "worst" financially, much like preparing for military security threats.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal, factual, and persuasive, centering on the legislative process and the protection of the results achieved. The speaker employs logical arguments, citing examples of the Kaitseliit's historical stability and its successful opposition to unreasonable proposals (such as the sale of the historical house). Furthermore, he expresses gratitude to the stakeholders while simultaneously and confidently defending the efficiency of the committee's work against any criticism.
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is analytical, conceptual, and concerned, emphasizing systemic flaws in state governance and the security sector. The author uses logical arguments and historical examples (such as the 2019 visit to the Narva border guard station) to justify the necessity of rapid structural changes. The tone is serious and cautionary, directly referencing the terrorist attacks in Ukraine and by Hamas as examples of a shifting threat assessment.
2024-04-01
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and inquisitive, posing pointed questions to the minister regarding specific issues. The tone is one of concern and emphasizes the gravity of the security threats, drawing upon the data and authority provided by the Director General of the Security Police Board.
2024-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting.
The style is analytical, critical, and urgent, emphasizing systemic flaws and the need for immediate strategic corrections. The speaker employs historical analogies (the War of Independence) and a logical structure to justify the necessity of a comprehensive vision. He sharply criticizes previous decisions ("a major mistake," "we simply lost ten years"), but avoids personal attacks, focusing instead on understanding the mechanisms behind the errors.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaking style is formal ("Esteemed Chairman of the Session! Dear Martin!"), analytical, and data-driven, focusing on the presentation of specific calculations and quotas. Logical argumentation is used instead of emotional appeals to raise pointed questions regarding the limits of the state's integration capacity. The tone is investigative and fact-based.
2024-03-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and interrogative, directly addressing the presiding officer of the session and the minister with polite phrases ("Honorable Presiding Officer! Dear Minister!"). The address is logical and focuses on the practical shortcomings of the policy, presenting a proposal for improvement in the form of a question.
2024-02-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is extremely concise, formal, and businesslike, confining itself solely to announcing the draft's objective. Emotional or logical appeals are absent; the address is concluded with the neutral phrase, "That is all."
2024-01-25
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and focuses on logical argumentation and procedural correctness. The appeal is aimed at clarity and the assignment of responsibility ("so that everyone in the country knows who is responsible for this"). It employs rhetorical exaggeration (overstatement) to illustrate the importance of the division of functions.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is extremely formal, concise, and informative. The tone is neutral and strictly businesslike, limited to a standard opening address and a brief introduction of the draft's subject matter. The speaker concludes abruptly with the phrase, "That is all," which signals a clear desire to avoid any argumentation or emotional appeal.
2024-01-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is extremely formal, concise, and procedural, utilizing standard forms of address ("Esteemed Chairman of the Session! Dear colleagues!"). The tone is neutral and descriptive, avoiding emotional appeals and emphasizing brevity with the phrases "That is all" and "I will not go into further detail."
2024-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The tone of the address is serious, businesslike, and urgent, especially regarding defense matters, emphasizing the need for swift decisions ("without delay"). The style is formal and analytical, relying on logical arguments and concrete figures, rather than emotional appeals. On the topic of defense, positions are presented as "military advice" to the Prime Minister, while the migration issue is framed as a direct, data-driven question.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The speaking style is formal and highly concise, especially when presenting legislative drafts. The emphasis is placed on logical and economic argumentation, expressing skepticism regarding the expected revenue from the government's tax hike ("I don't have much faith in it"). Emotional appeals are avoided; the focus remains on facts and economic consequences.
2024-01-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, addressing the session chair and the presenter respectfully. The question is posed as a logical and simple procedural inquiry, but contains implicit criticism regarding a procedural error. The tone is businesslike and focuses on the facts.