By Plenary Sessions: Hanah Lahe
Total Sessions: 25
Fully Profiled: 25
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is predominantly formal and matter-of-fact, especially during the presentation of the draft bill, where persuasive and logical arguments are employed, emphasizing the significance of democracy and inclusion. In the third speech, the tone shifts to become more critical and questioning, casting doubt on the session chairman’s desire to continue the work.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker's rhetoric is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing the session chair and the rapporteur. The style is logical and focused on clarification, posing a question that casts doubt on the veracity or justification of the claim presented by the other party.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, informative, and procedural, focusing on communicating the committee's work and decisions to the plenary session. Polite forms of address are used ("Honorable Chair," "Dear colleagues"), and emphasis is placed on the relevance of the discussion and the comprehensiveness of the answers received. The presentation is primarily logical and fact-based, devoid of emotional appeals.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style of the speech is highly formal, procedural, and informative. The speaker relies on logical arguments and the presentation of facts (session dates, the number of proposed amendments). The objective is to convey the progress of the proceedings in a neutral and matter-of-fact tone.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is analytical, critical, and procedural, focusing on the substantive and formal deficiencies of the draft bill. The arguments are logical, demanding an answer to the question of what alternative is being offered for measuring environmental impact upon the repeal of the reports. The tone is formal, but it contains sharp criticism directed at ideology-based lawmaking.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The speaker's style is predominantly combative and passionate, especially when communicating with opponents, using strong words like "stupidity," "conspiracy theories," and "ideological madness." He balances emotional appeals (embarrassment over the level of the debate) with logical arguments, relying on facts and expert assessments. In the commission's reports, the style is neutral and procedural, but there are also personal complaints about interruptions.
2025-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is serious, direct, and expresses moral indignation, employing emotional terms such as "heinous crimes." The speaker relies on public and media scrutiny and presents themselves as an "ordinary citizen" to underscore the widespread nature of the issue. The tone is demanding, posing a direct question to the minister regarding specific measures.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The speaker’s style is formal and respectful, respectfully addressing the chair of the session and the minister. The tone is constructive and inquisitive, focusing on seeking out new opportunities and promoting Estonia's success, utilizing logical argumentation.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and interrogative, employing logical and data-driven contrasts. The speaker poses critical rhetorical questions to highlight the selective focus of the presenter's arguments. The tone is concerned and sharp, particularly when emphasizing the severe health implications of oil shale.
2025-03-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The style is formal, interrogative, and analytical, employing logical appeals and referencing specific international examples. The speaker adopts a critical tone to highlight irrelevant topics introduced into the draft bill by the opposition. The questions are direct, demanding clarification from the opponent regarding the causes and consequences of climate change.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is highly formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing exclusively on the transmission of information and the reporting of committee decisions. The speaker employs a logical structure, enumerating the proposed amendments numerically and referencing specific legal statutes. Emotional or persuasive appeals are absent; this is purely an informational address.
2024-11-21
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The style is insistent and passionate, underscoring the severity of the climate crisis and the urgent need for action. When criticizing opponents, the tone is sharp and condemnatory, labeling their viewpoints as "foolishness" and "shameful." However, when presenting the draft law, the style becomes detailed and analytical, employing both emotional and logical appeals to justify the law's necessity in securing competitiveness.
2024-10-08
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, procedural, and analytical, focusing on conveying the results of the commission's work and deliberations. The speaker employs logical arguments and presents data (e.g., calculations of lost revenue), refraining from emotional or personal appeals. The tone is neutral and fact-based, with the aim of explaining the rationale behind the commission's decision.
2024-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, expressing gratitude for the work of the Chancellor of Justice. The tone regarding the subject (the climate crisis) is urgent and concerned, stressing the need for a dignified discussion and substantive solutions. The appeal is primarily logical and procedural, focusing on the quality of the political debate.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The style is formal and professional, presenting a question to the minister during a plenary session. The tone is concerned and urgent, stressing the severity of extreme weather conditions and the resulting human casualties. The argument is logical and relies on specific international examples to highlight the shortcomings in Estonia's preparedness.
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly formal, informative, and procedural, typical of a committee rapporteur addressing the plenary session. The overall tone is neutral and fact-based, but there is a brief, slightly sarcastic or defensive note in response to an intervention from the floor ("Was that a question or a reprimand?").
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is persuasive and analytical, focusing on logical arguments, data, and the systematic refutation of counterarguments. Rhetorical questions are used extensively to challenge opponents' arguments regarding the definition of maturity and life experience. The tone is generally optimistic and progressive, but it becomes sharper when criticizing the motives of conservative parties, labeling them as cynical.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is analytical and optimistic, highlighting the practical impact and economic benefits of climate policy. Logical arguments are employed, directly linking climate action to security, economic competitiveness, and an improved living environment. The tone is formal, focusing on data and policy objectives while avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, logical, and slightly cautionary, stressing the global and local extent of the water crisis. The speaker uses data and statistics (a logical appeal) and concludes with an emotional, yet value-based metaphor regarding the importance of Estonia's water resources.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, addressing the esteemed Chair of the session and the Minister. The tone is businesslike and policy-centric, stressing the urgency of climate change and requesting concrete plans for advancing education. Logical argumentation is employed, referencing existing political commitments.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly formal, neutral, and informative, suitable for the role of a parliamentary rapporteur. The speech is logically structured, focusing on the communication of facts, deadlines, and the summarizing of procedures. Emotional or persuasive appeals are absent; the presentation is factual and respectful ("Respected Chairman of the Session! Dear colleagues!").
2024-02-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, addressing both the Presiding Officer of the session and the Minister ("Honorable Presiding Officer! Honorable Minister!"). The tone is analytical and logical, presenting a question based on the premise that climate and foreign policy are closely linked.
2024-02-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, beginning with courteous opening remarks, but the content is sharp and accusatory. A direct line of questioning is employed regarding the opposing party's activities, and a new summons is threatened, based on an earlier precedent.
2024-01-25
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal, logical, and rigorous, especially regarding the quality of sources, criticizing the opponent's references to the portal "Eesti Eest!" and the "great reset." The speaker presents as a representative of the commission's position but is personally sharp in the debate, even correcting the pronunciation of their own name (Hanah, not Hanna).
2024-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style of the address is formal, procedural, and informative, fitting the role of a committee rapporteur addressing the plenary. The tone is neutral and fact-based, focusing on summarizing the debate, listing the participants, and communicating the consensus decision.