Session Profile: Evelin Poolamets
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
2025-11-04
Political Position
The political position is strongly opposed to the agreement proposed by the government, which is being treated as a calculated risk and a reckless venture. The criticism is value-based and targets the government's actions, which, in the speaker's estimation, run counter to the fundamental principle of a civilized society: the reduction of crime. Furthermore, emphasis is placed on the necessity of ensuring the procedural correctness of the legislative process and the availability of documentation, demanding that the Riigikogu (Parliament) assume responsibility.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Topic Expertise
The speaker demonstrates expertise in criminal policy and prisoner contracts, citing the experiences of Sweden and the Netherlands, where crime rates increased after similar agreements were terminated. Furthermore, the speaker shows proficiency in Riigikogu (Parliament) legislative procedures, stressing the necessity of verifying that all documents pertaining to the draft bill are complete before moving forward with the first reading.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Rhetorical Style
The rhetorical style is sharply accusatory and combative, utilizing strong emotional terms such as "adventure" and "adventurer," and leveling personal criticism at the minister. Although the arguments rely on logic (the experience of foreign countries, procedural shortcomings), the presentation remains intense and emphasizes the critical nature of the situation ("in a very bad situation").
2 Speeches Analyzed
Activity Patterns
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Opposition Stance
The main opponent is the minister, who is being criticized on a personal level (labeled an "adventurer"), and the government, which is accused of taking a calculated risk. The criticism is intense, addressing both substantive irregularities (like the rise in crime) and procedural flaws (such as missing documentation). Rather than showing a willingness to compromise, the demand is for the legislative process to be withdrawn and terminated immediately.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Collaboration Style
There is not enough data.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Regional Focus
The focus is on international comparisons (Sweden, the Netherlands) and simultaneously on a specific domestic institution, Tartu Prison. The mention of Tartu Prison is related to the question of whether the agreement's purpose is to ensure the prison's workload, rather than the reduction of crime.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Economic Views
Economic perspectives are confined to the suspicion that one of the contract's goals is to ensure the workload (specifically, that work at Tartu Prison would not cease), which suggests concern over the sustainability of employment within these institutions. There is no information available regarding broader fiscal, tax, or trade policy.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Social Issues
The primary social issue addressed is crime reduction and criminal policy, where the speaker strongly opposes measures that, in their view, actually increase crime. Emphasis is placed on the principle that a civilized society must work towards reducing crime, not the other way around.
2 Speeches Analyzed
Legislative Focus
The legislative focus is directed toward challenging a specific agreement and ensuring the procedural integrity of the Riigikogu (Parliament). The speaker is acting in the role of the challenger and demands the suspension of the first reading in order to ascertain the presence of all necessary documents accompanying the draft bill.
2 Speeches Analyzed