By Plenary Sessions: Arvo Aller
Total Sessions: 141
Fully Profiled: 141
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and pessimistic, employing strong negative language and name-calling (e.g., "green madness," "the ignoramuses"). The speaker stresses the logical consequences (a decline in food security and regional stability), but concludes with the emotional assertion that the negotiations are "one big sham." The tone is cautionary and deeply concerned.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is predominantly inquisitive and critical, posing sharp, skeptical questions to ministers and rapporteurs. The tone is accusatory, particularly concerning planning issues, where he/she directly references the interests of lobbyists and the opposing side (the Social Democrats) wanting to restrict public debate. Both logical arguments (budgetary accounting) and emotional appeals (democratic participation) are employed.
2025-10-07
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal and respectful, addressing both the chair of the session and the minister. The rhetoric is primarily logical and substantive, focusing on posing technical questions regarding the details of the budget. A brief, self-deprecating comparison is used involving another politician (Ernits) to highlight the sheer volume of the budget documents.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The speaker's rhetorical style is critical and combative, emphasizing the rottenness of the situation and the government's deliberate policy. Logical arguments are used, supported by concrete political examples (the car tax, PRIA bureaucracy, the postponement of subsidies). The tone is urgent, demanding solutions instead of addressing the consequences.
2025-09-22
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and demanding, employing sarcasm ("Well, great job!") and posing sharp questions to demand accountability. The speech is fact-based, focusing on specific times and the disregard for notification procedures. The tone is confrontational and emphasizes the government's inability to inform the members of the Riigikogu in a timely manner.
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
Insufficient information.
2025-09-15
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting
The speaker’s rhetorical style is critical, straightforward, and at times combative, particularly when addressing government inaction and tax policy. They employ strong logical arguments (for example, the land tax increases production costs) alongside emotional appeals (highlighting the difficult situation of farmers and the quality of the harvest). Specific examples and references to local events and journalism (Virumaa Teataja) are utilized.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The tone is confrontational and critical, containing direct accusations of spreading misinformation and demonstrating diplomatic incompetence. Emotional expressions are used, such as ("spinning one's wheels," "a huge stack of paper"), and the style is detailed and highly argumentative, especially when dissecting the dangers of the draft legislation. The speeches are repetitive and emphasize strong opposition.
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is direct, interrogative, and critical, employing a powerful metaphor ("the pantry is empty") to describe the resource deficit. The speaker balances an emotional defense of the local residents (Nursipalu) with a logical demand for accountability. The text includes an accusation regarding the "labeling" or "marking" of people, which adds a sharp edge to the overall tone.
2025-09-08
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The style is professional, concerned, and well-reasoned, focusing on the logical consequences that regulatory changes entail (e.g., difficulties in planning plant protection activities). Formal parliamentary language is used, and direct questions are posed to the minister to obtain feedback and clarification regarding the decisions that have been made.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is formal and professional, beginning with the address "respected session chair" and "dear colleagues." The tone is critical and demanding, particularly regarding the shortcomings in the government's activities and political culture. The arguments presented are mainly logical and fact-based, framing the inquiries as a list of specific questions.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp and combative, utilizing irony ("stagnation is progress") and challenging the government through the use of questions. The tone is critical and concerned, highlighting how Estonia is lagging behind its neighbors. The appeal is primarily logical and data-driven, relying on international rankings and economic facts.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, challenging the minister's assertions and labeling them outright lies. Logical arguments are employed, grounded in practical examples (apartment association utility bills, waste disposal costs for cemeteries) and highlighting the emphasis on increased bureaucracy. Strong imagery is utilized, comparing the system to a planned economy and dubbing the draft bill a "tangle" or "mess."
2025-06-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is confrontational, accusatory, and emotionally charged, especially concerning allegations of theft and abuse of power. The speaker begins with a humorous or nostalgic anecdote (the sprat sandwich) to undermine the previous speaker's narrative, but quickly shifts to sharp, moral accusations directed at the government.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is combative, accusatory, and urgent, emphasizing an emotional appeal concerning the welfare of the people and the government's negligence. Sharp political accusations are employed, such as the finance minister engaging in the implementation of Putin's propaganda. The speech is direct and strongly contrasts the government's actions with the vital needs of the populace.
2025-05-19
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is critical, frank, and forceful, particularly regarding the government's inaction in addressing root causes. Both logical arguments (citing laws and statistics) and an emotional warning about the replacement of the Estonian people and the overburdening of social services are utilized. The speaker directly addresses the presiding officer of the session, the Prime Minister, and the wider observing public.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and formal, focusing on requesting details and challenging the fundamental principles of the drafts. Both logical appeals, historical comparisons (milk quotas), and statistical facts (gender underrepresentation) are utilized. The tone is predominantly skeptical and procedural, but also includes sharp remarks directed at opponents, for example, criticizing the "mud-slinging" concerning the American president.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, fifth sitting, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and demanding, expressing strong regret and indignation (e.g., regarding the prosecutor's claims). Specific and emotionally charged case examples (rape, the theft of 6 million euros) are used to support the logical arguments. The tone is formal but direct, focusing on the absence of accountability and justice.
2025-05-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is suspicious, insistent, and confrontational, focusing on calling into question the minister's motives and the use of an accelerated procedure. Strong expressions like "cunning trick" are employed, and parallels are drawn with other unpopular decisions (such as the closure of rural schools). The speaker presents their views resolutely and makes direct negative predictions about the consequences of the law.
2025-05-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is critical and direct, specifically accusing the ministers of constantly passing the buck on the issue. Rhetorical questions are used to emphasize the illogical nature and ineffectiveness of the government's actions. The overall tone remains formal (given the plenary session setting), but it is laced with sharp criticism.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetoric is critical and challenging, particularly aimed at the government, highlighting their failures regarding tax increases. Simultaneously, a conditional "helping hand" cooperation is offered concerning the issue of lowering taxes. The style is logical and policy-centric, employing direct accusations ("wrong decisions") and clarifying questions concerning solidarity.
2025-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful ("Thank you, good chairman of the session! Esteemed Minister!"), but the substance is sharply interrogative and challenging. The speaker uses the minister's own terminology ("revenue minister") as a counter-argument to highlight the ambiguity of the financial strategy. The emphasis is on framing the question logically and factually.
2025-05-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and insistent, utilizing emotional appeals to highlight the difficulties of rural life ("the potholes are knee-deep"). The speaker contrasts the government's rhetoric of e-solutions with harsh real-world problems (expensive communication costs, inefficient public transportation), thereby calling into question the minister's rationality and understanding of rural life.
2025-04-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and appreciative towards the presenter, describing the discussion as "enjoyable" and "eye-opening." The speaker uses a rhetorical question ("How far do you think we can take this?") to emphasize the ambition and scope of the proposal. The tone is generally positive and professional.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, respectful, and analytical, addressing the "Esteemed Speaker of the Riigikogu" and the "Dear Minister." The speaker poses direct and logical questions aimed at exposing loopholes and ambiguities in the draft legislation, focusing strictly on facts and procedures, without resorting to emotional appeals.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and emotional, using examples of extreme crimes (rape, death) committed against vulnerable individuals to emphasize the government's inaction. The speaker poses questions directly to the Prime Minister, calling into question the government’s promises regarding the protection of the weakest members of society. The tone is confrontational and urgently demands answers.
2025-04-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and at times combative, accusing the ruling powers of hostility towards the populace and employing steamroller tactics against the opposition's sound initiatives. Both logical arguments (references to the experiences and studies of other countries) and emotional appeals are utilized, emphasizing consumers' hardships and the necessity of affording the cost of basic needs. The tone is formal yet sharp, while simultaneously offering the coalition assistance in implementing the tax reduction.
2025-04-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style is analytical and critical, concentrating on highlighting past political errors and the inconsistencies of other parties, particularly concerning the activities of Isamaa. The address is formal and logical, drawing on historical facts and cause-and-effect arguments, such as those related to the economic effects of phasing out oil shale. The tone carries a moderate sense of urgency, stressing the necessity of identifying and correcting current constraints.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is inquisitive and critical, employing rhetorical questions to call into question the expediency of the ministry's activities ("is this even necessary"). The tone is demanding, stressing the expectation that things will improve and procedures will become fairer and transparent to the public.
2025-04-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is factual, concerned, and direct, emphasizing the seriousness of the problem and the need for a swift solution. The speaker relies heavily on logical arguments and statistical data to illustrate the economic and ecological damage. The tone is formal, presenting eight structured questions to the minister and seeking clarification regarding the current hunting restrictions.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, respectfully addressing both the session chairman and the minister. Rhetorical questions ("Do I understand correctly...?") are repeatedly employed to underscore potential dangers and extreme negative consequences. The tone is cautious and apprehensive, pointing to the risk of a surveillance society and a police state emerging.
2025-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is critical and skeptical, characterizing the draft bill as a substitute activity. He employs logical appeals, repeatedly demanding comparative data on the economic performance of neighboring countries. The tone toward the Minister is overtly critical, referring to him as being "stuck" or "locked in" and expressing the desire for his resignation.
2025-03-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The speech is extremely brief, formal, and respectful, addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu ("Esteemed Speaker of the Riigikogu!"). The tone is direct, affirmative, and agreeable, focusing solely on conveying the necessary information.
2025-03-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly formal and interrogative, repeatedly addressing the "Esteemed Chair of the Session" and the "Honorable Minister/Rapporteur." The tone is analytical and focuses on clarifying the details and consequences of the draft legislation, seeking precise legal definitions. The appeals are purely logical and procedural, emphasizing inconsistencies and ambiguities.
2025-03-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The style is analytical and inquiry-based, beginning with a polite address to the session chair and the presenter. The speaker employs logical argumentation to expose the superficial cheapness of wind energy and puts forward a concrete legislative proposal to eliminate subsidies. The tone is measured and focuses on economic facts.
2025-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, respectfully addressing the presiding officer and the presenters. The speaker focuses on logical appeals, repeatedly demanding specific examples and evidence regarding which people, currently left without assistance, the protocol would actually help.
2025-03-18
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, direct, and critical, incorporating both substantive and procedural attacks. Rhetorical questions are employed, and answers are demanded, while simultaneously criticizing the minister's lengthy preamble on democracy and the role of the session chair ("the role of the pioneer leader"). The tone is skeptical and demanding.
2025-03-17
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is questioning, concerned, and challenging, particularly regarding demographic and security issues. The speaker utilizes logical arguments and data but also expresses strong ideological opposition, labeling the green transition as propaganda. All appearances conclude with a direct question posed to the minister or the prime minister.
2025-02-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and accusatory, expressing utter bewilderment regarding the opponent's incompetence. Direct questions are utilized, and long-term speculations (such as the price of electricity in 2035) are contrasted with the immediate reality (next week's price).
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is confrontational and critical, posing direct questions to the Prime Minister and accusing him of evading answers. This includes urgent appeals directed at the government ("Just admit it for once!"). The emphasis is placed on political opposition and highlighting the ineffectiveness of the policy.
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on the long-term consequences of the constitutional amendment and the future of the nation. The speaker employs logical appeals, highlighting the link between the privileges and obligations of citizenship and encouraging the acquisition of citizenship. The tone is serious and persuasive, aiming to shift the coalition's support toward an alternative proposal.
2025-02-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session.
The style is analytical and concerned, focusing on logical arguments (e.g., the nuances of coach funding) and educational values (discipline, determination). The speaker uses personal observations and conversations with teachers to underscore the scope of the issue. Political cynicism is evident at the end of the address, hinting that regarding a topic initiated by a coalition member, "nothing will actually happen."
2025-02-19
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, directed straight at the Minister of Defence during the plenary session. The focus is on logical explanation and political accuracy, avoiding emotional or aggressive appeals. The tone is businesslike and concerned, emphasizing the need to ensure the visibility of the border both for our own people and for our neighbors.
2025-02-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is confrontational and accusatory, beginning by admonishing the presenter to be more reserved with their lies. A skeptical appeal to logic is employed, demanding clarification regarding the distribution of economic benefits and posing rhetorical questions concerning the motives of the opposition.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, accusatory, and confrontational, utilizing intense expressions such as "outright lies" and "especially hypocritical." The speaker relies on logical argumentation, repeatedly posing questions regarding the contradiction between the claims of subsidies and low cost. He/She also criticizes the opposing side's name-calling and hypocritical justification.
2025-01-28
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, posing pointed and clarifying questions to the Minister of the Interior. The tone is one of concern, highlighting the existence of logical arguments and regulatory loopholes, thereby referencing the risk of system abuse. The language employed is policy-focused and technical, deliberately avoiding emotional appeals.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is critical and combative, particularly concerning the government's priorities, employing powerful rhetorical questions ("Is the rest of the world... really that stupid?"). Both logical arguments (budget versus subsistence) and emotional appeals are utilized, directly linking food availability to patriotism.
2025-01-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and analytical, grounded in logical arguments and focused on exposing the flaws of the draft legislation. Specific and vivid examples are employed (such as black-and-yellow striped tape or ladder instruction manuals) to illustrate the extent of bureaucracy and the severity of disproportionate penalties. The tone is concerned and cautionary, emphasizing the worsening situation facing manufacturers.
2025-01-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, interrogative, and demanding, repeatedly employing rhetorical questions to challenge the actions of the coalition and the commission. The tone is one of concern and demands accountability, emphasizing procedural inconsistencies and a lack of transparency, while accusing that the procedure is being made "even darker."
2025-01-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speech is urgent in tone, critical, and emotionally charged, especially regarding regional security issues, using expressions like "for heaven's sake" and "pure surrender." The criticism is aimed at the short-sightedness of the minister and the government, who look only at the Excel spreadsheet, as if "wearing blinders." Logical arguments (the consolidation of institutions, the Bornhöhe tradition) are interwoven with emotional appeals concerning people's safety and the continuity of the state.
2024-12-19
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is two-part: initially short, direct, and assertive, but it concludes with an unexpected transition to a solemn and personal tone. Simple language is used, along with a poem welcoming the new year, which lends the address an emotional and informal conclusion.
2024-12-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal, detailed, and critically analytical, respectfully addressing both the chairman of the session and the minister. Focus is placed on logical arguments, citing the explanatory memorandum and regulations, and rhetorical questions are employed to challenge the policy's justifications. The overall tone is one of concern and caution regarding the injustice and bureaucracy arising for agricultural producers.
2024-12-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and interrogative, repeatedly employing rhetorical questions to highlight the contradictions and illogic inherent in the presenter's positions. The tone is concerned and demanding, stressing the security policy and social importance of regional presence. The speaker uses a logical appeal, contrasting virtual solutions (video, AI) with the necessity of physical presence.
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The tone is analytical, critical, and occasionally sharp, particularly concerning the lack of consistency in legislation. The speaker poses direct and detailed questions to the presenters, demanding justifications and explanations. In the lengthy speech, he employs both logical argumentation (constitutional contradictions, lack of a compensation mechanism) and emotional appeal (jobs, the sensitive region of Ida-Virumaa).
2024-12-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth session, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is serious, concerned, and critical, emphasizing a direct threat to Estonian security. Both logical arguments—based on the testimonies of military experts and international examples (Sweden)—and emotional appeals are employed. The second speech focuses on people's health and living environment, linking social problems (out-migration) with a decline in national defense capabilities.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The tone is critical and concerned, highlighting the "drastic changes" proposed by the bills and the creation of social problems. Both logical appeals (such as funding inequality) and emotional accusations are employed, claiming the government is "strangling" business. The style is formal, yet it incorporates sharp metaphors (e.g., the government lives in a "silo").
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, emotional, and forceful, expressing deep disappointment over the reintroduction of the bill in its identical form. Strong value judgments and moralizing language are employed, referring to child abusers as "crazies" and "pedophiles." The speaker addresses colleagues as "fellow combatants" and concludes with a direct appeal to vote against the law.
2024-12-02
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and urgent, demanding quicker decision-making and clarity from the minister. The appeal is primarily logical and procedural, focusing on deadlines, the public procurement process, and the inefficiency of administrative management. The speaker uses detailed examples (sowing cycles) to support their arguments.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical and procedurally focused, employing formal address when speaking to the chair and the presenter. The tone is critical of the Social Democrats and the coalition, concentrating on logical arguments and procedural failures. The speaker poses questions that challenge the opposing side's rhetoric and procedural decisions.
2024-11-19
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session.
The style is formal and critical, focusing on logical arguments concerning the inefficiency of the administrative structure. The characterizing term "mammoth agency" (mammutamet) is used to describe the new authority. In the second address, the tone is direct and procedural, demanding an explanation from the session chairman regarding the voting results and the dissenters.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The tone is critical, but occasionally appreciative, praising the chairman of the Finance Committee for providing substantive answers. He uses strong and memorable phrases ("budget of tax hikes," "financing of green madness") and emphasizes the government's alleged misstatements (such as linking the car tax to support for people with disabilities). He appeals both to logic (the list of taxes) and to emotions (the deterioration of living standards in rural areas).
2024-11-12
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is interrogative and combative, repeatedly employing rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the government's motives ("Is this intended to shut down Estonian industry?"). The tone is critical and grounded in logic, emphasizing the protection of citizens' rights and prioritizing substantive quality over trivial time savings. In addition to those present in the hall, the speaker addresses "the people behind the screens," thereby expanding their audience.
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is persuasive and at times confrontational, directly addressing both the audience in the hall and the wider public ("Good people who are watching us via the internet"). A stark contrast is drawn between the opposition to the coalition and the positive effects of the draft bill, accusing opponents of hypocrisy for demanding impact assessments. The tone is passionate and includes rhetorical questions (for example, regarding a three-day work week).
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, direct, and demanding, focusing on the repeated asking of questions and the requirement of specific justifications in both economic and foreign policy matters. Rhetorical questions are employed to cast doubt on the rationality and consistency of the coalition's standpoints.
2024-11-05
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, using questions to scrutinize government accountability. The tone is critical yet courteous, and the emphasis is on logical argumentation and the demand for specific financial data. Procedural issues are also noted (the absence of the report on paper).
2024-11-04
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speech is predominantly critical and concerned, employing strong language such as "nonsense" and "hocus-pocus" to characterize the government's actions. The speaker utilizes both logical arguments (job losses of 5,000 versus 1,000) and emotional appeals (security, villages being left deserted). The style is formal and detailed, addressing the ministers directly and posing specific questions regarding the technical nuances of the draft legislation.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and confrontational, often employing rhetorical questions to challenge the logic behind government actions. When addressing social issues, irony and strong emotional judgments are used ("utterly ridiculous," "for heaven's sake"), along with examples that ridicule the topic of social gender. The overall tone is passionate and concerned, particularly regarding security and the national language.
2024-10-22
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and challenging, posing a direct and sharp question regarding the consistency of the presenter's claims. The tone is formal ("Dear presenter!"), but the substance appeals to logic, avoiding emotional expressions.
2024-10-21
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, inquisitive, and slightly confrontational. It employs irony and simplified language—such as the phrase ("to explain to the common people and to me as a citizen")—to underscore the illogical nature of the government's policy. The tone is critical and demands precision, particularly regarding the mathematical interpretation of taxes, emphasizing the logical discrepancy (the export and import paradox).
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, focusing on logical arguments and the verification of documents (legal text, appendix). The tone is critical, especially toward the minister, who is accused of talking about how he is being "bullied" instead of addressing substantive issues. The speaker demands precise and technical answers, citing specific sections of the law and numerical data.
2024-10-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and emotional, emphasizing the "emotional trauma" inflicted upon citizens and the "brutality" of the police. The speaker employs numerous rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the motives of the police and the minister, demanding concrete accountability instead of an apology.
2024-10-15
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and question-oriented, focusing on the demand for logical and detailed explanations. Direct questions are posed to the presenter to highlight administrative discrepancies and procedural shortcomings. The tone is neutral and analytical, avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical and inquisitive, focusing on logical argumentation and procedural accuracy. Rhetorical questions are often employed to demand justifications from the government regarding both the extension of procedural deadlines and budgetary reallocations. The tone is formal and detail-oriented, avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-10-07
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly combative, critical, and blunt, accusing the minister of "talking nonsense" and labeling the continuation of Rail Baltic a utopia. The arguments are heavily fact-based, focusing on the deficiencies of specific projects and regional threats, but they also incorporate an emotional element (saving human lives).
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and combative, employing strong language (e.g., "a complete mess," "incompetence," "insanity"). The appeals are primarily logical and fact-based, referencing specific figures and legal statutes, but these are interwoven with sharp political criticism aimed at opponents. Figurative language is utilized (e.g., "they are piling stones into entrepreneurs' backpacks and then whipping them as well") alongside rhetorical questions.
2024-09-24
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The speaking style is highly formal and interrogative, concentrating on obtaining logical explanations and providing technical solutions. The presenter maintains a neutral tone, respectfully addressing those giving the reports and posing questions aimed at achieving clarity and reducing bureaucracy. There are no emotional appeals or narratives; the focus remains strictly on details and procedures.
2024-09-23
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful ("esteemed presiding officer"), yet simultaneously sharply questioning, particularly regarding procedural decisions. The speaker employs logical arguments and seeks clarification, emphasizing the need for a broader understanding of international norms and the justification of internal decisions. The tone is predominantly analytical and scrutinizing.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The discourse is formal, analytical, and inquisitive, focusing on logical arguments and legal details. The tone is predominantly neutral, but becomes critical when addressing ambiguous terms or potential digital exclusion. The style is aimed at obtaining explanations and clarifications, rather than emotional persuasion.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and emotionally charged, relying on extensive lists detailing government failures. Sharp rhetorical questions ("What else needs to happen?") and irony are employed to underscore the gravity of the situation and incite public outrage. The tone remains formal, but the content is sharply critical.
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The tone is critical, factual, and at times emotional, particularly regarding the oil shale issue, where personal connection to the industry is stressed ("brought bread to the family table"). The style is formal, utilizing logical arguments (procedural errors, EIA costs) and repeatedly posing sharp rhetorical questions to the minister. The draft law is explicitly called "anti-business" and "imposed," emphasizing the negative impact of rushing it through.
2024-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and combative, utilizing rhetorical questions and veiled sarcasm, thereby calling the minister's competence into question. The address is formal (directed at the session chair and the respondent), but its content is sharply oppositional and emotionally charged, emphasizing the damage inflicted upon rural areas.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is questioning and confrontational, addressing direct questions to the minister facing a confidence vote concerning both his background and his agenda. Appeals to history and ideology are employed (the Communist Party, Red Army infrastructure) to criticize political opponents, all while maintaining the formal tone of the session.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is combative and critical, employing strong language, such as "completely absurd!" and the claim that "taxation into poverty is proceeding full speed ahead." It utilizes both logical arguments (economic recession, revenue projections) and emotional appeal, urging "people with a conscience" to vote in favor of the repeal. The tone remains formal, yet its substance is sharp and oppositional.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, skeptical, and demanding, especially concerning the justification of taxes and the mandate for their imposition. Both logical argumentation (a mathematical proof detailing the size of the VAT increase) and social appeals (focusing on the impact on poorer people and potential food scarcity) are utilized. The speaker poses questions directly and skeptically, expressing clear distrust concerning the cancellation of the tax on sugary beverages.
2024-07-15
15th Riigikogu, Extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is sharp and confrontational, accusing the rapporteur of defending coalition partners and justifying a law that violates the constitution. Rhetorical questions and logical argumentation are employed to highlight procedural errors and the law's inconsistency. The tone is formal, but distinctly critical and oppositional.
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is critical and at times sharp, combining logical argumentation (questioning the logic behind costs and revenues) with emotional appeals focused on protecting citizens' wallets. Formal language is employed, but direct attacks are launched against the legislative procedure and the preparation of the rapporteurs, describing the situation as "embarrassing" and "a new level."
2024-06-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is confrontational and critical, particularly towards the Prime Minister, whose responses are characterized as unrealistically optimistic ("Estonia is like one big flower garden"). Strong rhetorical questions are employed to highlight the injustice and lack of transparency in the government's actions. The tone is formal, but sharply adversarial in content.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative and critical, accusing the government of lying and breaking its promises. It utilizes both emotional appeals (such as the situation in rural areas and the expropriation of property) and procedural and technical arguments (including errors in the explanatory memorandum and the drafting of amendments). The speaker urges members of parliament to vote against the car tax and to support the Estonian Conservative People's Party in the European Parliament elections.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is formal, demanding, and consistently skeptical, especially concerning the answers provided by the respondent. The speaker employs procedural criticism (the lack of information regarding the prime minister's whereabouts) as an introduction to the substantive issue. He emphasizes the potential impact of secret discussions on global changes, referencing "new world order" theories.
2024-06-04
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, emphasizing the unjust and unfair nature of the government's actions toward pensioners. Emotional appeals are employed (impoverishment, broken promises, "the cherry on top"), concluding with a direct political call to vote against the ruling coalition in the European Parliament elections. The tone is formal, but the content is sharply adversarial.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is combative and accusatory, commencing with a sharp refutation of the minister's rosy depiction ("life is like a flower"). Powerful rhetorical questions are employed to underscore ethical failings and pressure the minister to acknowledge the necessity of resignation. The tone is formal, yet the substance is sharp and critical.
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and analytical, focusing on procedural errors in the legislative process and the specific wording of the draft bill. Logical arguments are employed, referencing concrete figures (520,000 landowners) and the text of the explanatory memorandum, blending this with an emotional appeal concerning food security and the burden placed upon private property owners. The speaker is direct and requests additional time from the session chair.
2024-05-29
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is critical, direct, and procedural, focusing on facts and contradictions found in official statements. The speaker poses pointed questions, demanding accountability and clarification regarding both the border violation and the deficiencies in the emergency notification system. He uses strong language, referring to the conduct of the Russian border guards as "hooligans."
2024-05-28
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet sharply interrogative and skeptical, demanding specific figures and answers. Logical appeals are employed to highlight the negative impact of the policy on pensioners. Sarcasm is also present, referencing the competence of the opposing party's former ministers.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker's rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and at times ironic, using dismissive phrases like "beautiful numbers" and "charade." The appeal is primarily logical and fact-based, focusing on policy inconsistencies, the shortcomings of the draft law, and practical negative consequences. The overall tone is distrustful and accusatory regarding the government's actions.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is combative, urgent, and directly challenging, calling into question the currency and accuracy of government data ("I don't know which day's memo you are reading there"). The style is predominantly logical and data-driven, relying on statistics and journalistic sources. However, sharp language is also employed, referencing an emotional issue and a potential conflict of interest within the ministry.
2024-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and inquisitive, expressing confusion and skepticism regarding the regulations presented ("Well, now things are getting confusing"). The speaker employs formal language and relies on logical arguments, demanding clarification from the minister concerning the practical application of the policy and the technical details.
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is critical and direct, beginning with the acknowledgement that no answer was received. The speaker employs a series of questions to shift attention from the specific incident to a wider, socially sensitive security threat. The appeal is a blend of logical concern (a greater security threat) and emotional concern (the sense of security among the elderly).
2024-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and direct, especially during the no-confidence debate, where sharp questions and rhetorical challenges are employed ("Is this the future Estonian school, then?"). Emphasis is placed on the minister's avoidance of responsibility and distancing himself from the problems. The appeals are rather logical and fact-based, referring to specific events (the blunder of April 9) and organizations (the Estonian Association of Cities and Municipalities).
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative and critical, employing strong metaphors such as "steamroller" and labeling the replacement of physical education "complete nonsense." The appeal is primarily logical and data-driven, highlighting the cumulative impact of taxes and the irrationality of administrative costs. Although the tone is formal, the content is intensely critical of the government and its procedural actions.
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
The speaker's style is critical and confrontational, repeatedly employing the metaphor of the "steamroller" to characterize the government's actions. The arguments presented are primarily logical and procedural, raising detailed questions regarding the technical aspects and potential side effects of the proposed legislation (e.g., dragging out proceedings to secure higher fines).
2024-04-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, demanding, and highly interrogative, focusing on the lack of answers and the insistence on extracting details. The presenter uses logical arguments and statistical data to support their views and addresses the correction of misinformation (specifically, the misinterpretation of Martin Helme's position) presented by the opposing side.
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, utilizing logical arguments, statistics (a drop in trustworthiness to 40%), and references to official documents. Figurative language is employed to criticize the legislative process, exemplified by the phrase: "first there should be an egg, and only then should one cackle." The tone is accusatory, aimed particularly at the government, and repeatedly poses unanswered questions regarding the example set by other democratic countries.
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly formal and analytical, focusing on the detailed dissection of draft legislation content and the explanation of legal amendments. The tone is informative and explanatory, but shifts to critical and questioning when the centralization of regional policy is discussed. The appeals are primarily logical, relying on laws, directives, and practical examples (e.g., the dilemma of a council member).
2024-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and skeptical, employing rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the minister's claims ("why are we even bothering with inquiries then"). Both formal language and vernacular expressions (e.g., "dummies") are utilized, illustrating political problems through concrete, real-life examples (the tractor queue when driving toward Narva). The style is a blend of practical logic and anecdotal illustration.
2024-04-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone is pressing and critical, especially regarding the government's inaction, referring to the insufficient funds as "candy money" and governance as being conducted "based on an Excel spreadsheet." The speaker employs both logical arguments (security, accreditation requirements) and emotional appeals, criticizing the youth's tendency to become "influencers" and the notion that food simply comes from the store. The style is formal, but incorporates personal recollections and references (a former deskmate, experience from their time as a minister).
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style of discourse is formal, logical, and argumentative, focusing on economic efficiency and cost reduction. It utilizes both logical appeals (such as the reduction of costs per unit of goods) and a critical tone toward the government's green transition policies, which are deemed inefficient and detrimental to the economy. Both questions and a specific proposal for a legislative amendment are presented.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, third sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is accusatory and critical, particularly concerning the minister's personal conduct, highlighting illegality and hypocrisy. Logical argumentation is employed, citing public sources (registers, media, and a quote from the Transport Administration) and posing pointed questions that demand specific answers. The tone is formal, but the content is confrontational.
2024-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, expressing skepticism toward the government's responses, which are deemed overly general and unrealistic ("it seems like everything is rosy"). Logical arguments and concrete examples (school closures, budget figures) are used to emphasize the negative consequences of the policy.
2024-04-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and assertive. Short and clear sentences are used, focused on fulfilling procedural requirements; emotional or narrative elements are absent.
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and interrogative, presenting the rapporteur with many direct and detailed inquiries, often concerning procedural or technical details. The tone is at times skeptical, particularly regarding the voting results (4:4) and the language proficiency of the refugees. Anecdotal evidence is employed (2 out of 12 children knew Ukrainian) to support their viewpoints.
2024-04-03
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is anxious and critical, highlighting the farmers' "headache" and ongoing "anxiety" stemming from the mounting bureaucracy. The speaker employs logical arguments (such as inefficient work organization) and contrasts the farmers' concerns with the satisfaction felt by ornithologists. The presentation itself is concrete, problem-focused, and calls for a straightforward message regarding potential solutions.
2024-04-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and focuses on facts. The speaker poses direct and technical questions to the minister, aiming to elicit detailed explanations regarding regulations and their implementation. Emotional or personal appeals are absent; the dominant tone is logical and information-seeking.
2024-04-01
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly critical, demanding, and at times confrontational, particularly when responding to inquiries. The speaker employs rhetorical techniques to cast doubt on the respondent's knowledge, noting that "Answering a question with a question doesn't demonstrate much awareness." They utilize both logical arguments (procedural errors) and emotional appeals (raising children is hard work).
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, often employing logical questioning and highlighting contradictions within the text of the law. Rhetorical questions are utilized to underscore cybersecurity threats and criticize the government's actions, suggesting that the long-term success of the Reform Party may be favorable to the neighboring state. Procedural criticism is also leveled against the rapporteur and the committee.
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is critical and demanding, emphasizing the government's responsibility and inaction. The speaker uses a formal and matter-of-fact tone, posing questions supported by specific facts and figures (e.g., 700 million euros). They also introduce corrections to the minister’s earlier statements in the interest of factual accuracy.
2024-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting.
The speaker’s rhetorical style is combative and forceful, employing strong emotional appeals, particularly concerning the plight of the Estonian people and families. He sharply contrasts his party’s concern with the government’s indifference and hostility toward families. The argumentation is a blend of logical economic linkages (VAT versus the final consumer price) and political accusation (the actions of the coalition).
2024-03-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, interrogative, and ironic, utilizing the presentation of a dilemma to challenge the government's self-justification. The speaker employs strong accusations, specifically naming a particular minister as "the most hostile towards children and families." The style is formal, yet the substance is emotionally charged and critical.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet frequently confrontational and demanding, particularly when addressing ministers and rapporteurs. Sharp accusations are employed (for instance, describing the Reform Party's actions as "parading in borrowed plumes") and the rapporteur's subjective "perception" is dismissed. Comparative examples (such as national costumes at the Song Festival) are utilized within the context of social issues to bolster logical arguments.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and analytical, beginning with polite salutations ("Respected Chairman," "Dear Minister"). The criticism concerning delays in teachers' salaries is sharp and deeply concerned, highlighting the injustice of the situation. Questions regarding the environment and the budget are detailed and technical, focusing on logical justification and the precise clarification of financial figures.
2024-03-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The speaker's rhetorical style is confrontational and persistently interrogative, repeatedly challenging ministers and demanding explanations. He uses many rhetorical questions (e.g., "Why has the government taken from families but not from banks?"). The tone is formal and focuses on political criticism, relying on political arguments rather than emotional appeals.
2024-02-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is confrontational and ironic, especially regarding the arguments put forth by the social democrats, which are deemed ridiculous and fear-mongering. Emotional and colorful expressions are employed ("hodgepodge," "peculiar impression") to underscore their position. The appeal is primarily logical, stressing the central government's need for a clear partner at the local level.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is factual but insistent, emphasizing the need for swift action to alleviate the hardships faced by the public and farmers. It utilizes both logical arguments (stimulating consumption, stable revenue collection) and emotional appeals (people’s standard of living has deteriorated, people must be fed), all while maintaining a high level of formality. Comparisons are also drawn to the positive effects of previous tax reductions (excise duties).
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The style is direct, interrogative, and occasionally features light irony, such as the suggestion to hand the minister a pen for taking notes. The speaker employs an emotional appeal, referring to rescuers and police officers as "our eyes" and "ears," thereby stressing the priority of internal security. Emphasis is placed on logical argumentation and fact-checking (specifically regarding Zelenskyy's claims).
2024-02-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The style is formal, respectful, and inquisitive, beginning with the acknowledgment of the presenter's activities ("very important and necessary"). The speaker employs logical argumentation, focusing on a specific financial sum and clarifying its meaning (whether it concerns supporting Ukraine or the export of Estonian e-governance).
2024-02-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and substantive, beginning with praise for the presenter ("A very relevant and highly insightful overview"). The speaker uses logical arguments concerning the relationship between the tax burden and consumption, and presents their political solution (lowering the value-added tax) in the form of a question.
2024-02-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The style starts off light and humorous, noting that insects are causing a stir in the hall, but it quickly shifts to being formal, logical, and analytical. The speaker employs rhetorical questions to challenge procedural inconsistencies (like the mention of lawsuits) and relies on laws and official documents to substantiate their arguments. Ultimately, the tone is persuasive and aimed at securing the support of the delegates.
2024-02-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting.
The speaker adopts a formal, inquiry-oriented style, utilizing standard forms of address when engaging the presiding officer and the rapporteur. Emphasis is placed on clarifying facts and procedural details, particularly regarding the NGO’s activities and the voting results. The tone is businesslike and centered on achieving logical clarity.
2024-02-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is critical, direct, and forceful, employing strongly negative terms such as "green madness" and "green frenzy." The speaker poses sharp questions to the prime minister and urges the government to realize that shutting down production in Estonia "will not save the world." The appeal is a blend of economic logic (lack of sustainability) and emotional pressure (the sentiments of the farmers).
2024-02-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, pragmatic, and interrogative, respectfully addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the Prime Minister. The speaker poses direct questions aimed at clarifying specific data and political plans (e.g., lists of the unemployed, RES plans). A logical and fact-based approach dominates over emotionality, relying on the speaker's personal previous experience.
2024-01-25
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly serious and critical, especially concerning the rejection of opposition bills, but remains polite initially (Thank you, esteemed Chair of the session!). Both logical arguments (the necessity of legislative amendments to ensure security) and emotional appeals (to show solidarity with farmers and stand up for Estonian food security) are employed. The closing address is particularly passionate, criticizing the demise of rural life.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal, direct, and highly concise, suitable for introducing a legislative initiative to the plenary session. The speaker uses polite forms of address ("Esteemed Deputy Speaker of the Riigikogu! Dear colleagues!") and presents logical, policy-based arguments. Emotional appeals or narratives are absent; the focus is strictly on the goals of the draft legislation and requesting support.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The style is formal and direct, utilizing addresses directed at the session chairman and the prime minister. The tone is rather concerned and emphasizes the urgency of security matters, focusing on the logical framing of the inquiry regarding the government's plans. The question is posed in a demanding rather than a conciliatory tone.
2024-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The tone is critical and concerned, particularly regarding coercive measures and issues of regional inequality. He/She employs both logical argumentation (referencing legislation and financial data) and personal experience as a board member of an apartment association to illustrate the negative impact of the policies. The style is formal, respectfully addressing the presiding officer and the ministers, while simultaneously expressing strong opposition.
2024-01-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and procedural, focusing on the presentation of draft legislation and the posing of specific questions to the minister. The arguments are predominantly logical and economically justified, referencing inflation and the public's ability to cope. A defensive and critical tone is also present in defending Parliament's right to ask questions against the presumptions of coalition members.
2024-01-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and interrogative, making it suitable for the format of an information session. The tone is concerned and demanding, emphasizing logical argumentation and the government's responsibility for ensuring security and education. In their questions, the speaker relies on specific facts and recent media coverage (e.g., the KAPO notification, news published yesterday).
2024-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and argumentative, emphasizing the urgency of the topic and the necessity of action. The speaker employs rhetorical questions and contrasts (e.g., the peace of the grave versus the glorification of occupation) to refute the opposing side's justifications. The tone is formal, but sharp and demanding in content.
2024-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and confrontational, employing strong and emotionally charged expressions such as "taxing to death" and allusions to the "hushing up" of the investigation. Numerous direct and rhetorical questions are used to challenge the results and motives of the government's policy. At the same time, the speaker ironically points out the presenter's mechanical reading ability.
2024-01-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, commencing with respectful addresses to the Chair of the session and the presenter. The speaker focuses on logical and procedural deliberation, posing direct questions with the aim of clarifying the validity of competence and avoiding misunderstanding.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, addressing colleagues and the chair of the session. The tone is procedural and includes a subtle element of self-defense regarding the Riigikogu's (Parliament's) workload, stressing that "no one can say we aren't doing our job." Logical arguments and specific numerical references to tax legislation are employed.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The style is formal and analytical, beginning with a polite greeting directed at the Minister and the Chair of the session. The speaker employs logical argumentation, posing hypothetical questions ("is it not possible that we might then face a situation where...") to highlight procedural risks and the lack of transparency.