By Plenary Sessions: Evelin Poolamets
Total Sessions: 115
Fully Profiled: 115
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
The rhetorical style adopted is critical and demanding, posing pointed questions to the government regarding its new goals and measures. Juxtaposition is employed (economic figures versus demographic indicators), along with the slightly ironic phrase "number magic." The focus is placed on logical failure and the absence of tangible results.
2025-10-07
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and confrontational, focusing on condemning the opposing side's behavior. Hyperbole is employed (the example of taking the minister's trousers off) to underscore the necessity of defining the limits of inappropriate conduct. The speech is formal (an address to the chairman), yet it carries a strong emotional charge due to the insult.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and pressing, utilizing strong negative metaphors (e.g., "we were promised an elephant and got a mouse," "a massive hole in the state budget"). The speaker relies heavily on financial data, risk analysis, and comparing government promises with reality to justify the necessity of halting the project. The government is accused of dishonesty and concealing the truth.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong emotional and labeling expressions (e.g., "green racket," "fake science," "bottomless black hole"). Appeals are made regarding economic damage and the threat to sovereignty, accusing the opposing side (the liberal majority) of being detached from reality. Rhetorical questions are used to highlight contradictions.
2025-09-08
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet passionate and deeply concerned, particularly regarding rural life and small-scale beekeepers. A balanced approach is utilized, combining emotional appeals (culture, clean food) with concrete economic and ecological arguments. Criticism directed at the government is sharp, accusing them of lacking proper analysis and demonstrating an unfair bias.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The tone is predominantly formal, critical, and well-argued, employing logical reasoning and data in parliamentary inquiries and draft legislation (e.g., the increase in CO2 quota prices, the drop in the specific fertility rate). There is also sharp, personal criticism directed at Reform Party ministers, accusing them of arrogant behavior and denigrating female members of parliament. In the realm of tax policy, value-based rhetoric is utilized, recalling the tax principles established by the right-wing government.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and insistent, employing strong emotional appeals (the sacrifice of domestic peace, the destruction of the living environment). Sharp and accusatory language is utilized ("green madness," "the developers' law," "green transition fanatics"), and citizens' concerns are pitted against the haste of the state and developers. The appeals are a blend of legal and technical argumentation and personal experience (the impact on farmhouses).
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal and question-driven, utilizing respectful forms of address (Esteemed Chairman of the Session, Good Minister). The speaker poses direct, detailed questions, focusing on the logical acquisition of information and the clarification of concrete plans. The tone is neutral and businesslike.
2025-06-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, challenging, and extremely serious, focusing on social injustice and violence. Logical argumentation is employed, citing specific facts and journalistic sources, to pressure the minister into acknowledging responsibility. The tone is accusatory and demands a clear answer regarding the scope of responsibility for care homes.
2025-06-09
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, critical, and forceful, especially directed at the Reform Party, which is accused of giving reality-denying answers. The speaker employs both emotional appeals (the price of sovereignty) and logical argumentation, drawing on Defense Forces experts and facts. Rhetorical questions are utilized ("Are we dumber than Sweden?") and the acute nature of the threat on the eastern border is emphasized.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The tone is critical, concerned, and urgent, employing strong emotional and moral appeals (e.g., "greenwashing," "wild west," "they are plundering a great deal"). The style is formal, but includes sharp accusations directed at the government and developers, emphasizing the necessity of justice and equal treatment. It utilizes both technical data (heights, power outputs) and narratives concerning quality of life and health.
2025-06-02
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The style is predominantly confrontational, critical, and emotionally charged, especially when discussing social tragedies, employing phrases such as "systemic failure" and "moral failure." He/She uses powerful rhetorical questions and emphasizes the violation of the principles of the rule of law. The minister's responses are considered insufficient and indicative of a lack of understanding of the situation.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, critical, and at times ideologically charged, especially concerning tax policy and European Union bureaucracy. Strong emotional and metaphorical expressions are used (e.g., "choking grip," "senseless burden," "green accounting gone over with a red pencil"). Despite formal considerations, the tone is generally accusatory, criticizing the indifferent and uncomprehending looks of the coalition deputies.
2025-05-19
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The speech is urgent in tone, extremely critical, and confrontational, accusing the government of "hypocritical lies" and avoiding uncomfortable topics. It employs both emotional appeals (the destruction of the nation-state) and logical appeals (statistics, examples from Western Europe), emphasizing the need for decisive political will.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, repeatedly addressing the rapporteur. The tone is critical and investigative, focusing on highlighting political contradictions (gender equality) and procedural discrepancies (conflict of interest, constitutionality). The appeals are primarily logical and procedural, emphasizing the precise correspondence between the content of the bill and the explanatory memorandum.
2025-05-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, insistent, and direct, especially concerning energy issues, where strong contrasts are employed (e.g., "green vs. red," "a return to truth and knowledge"). The appeals are primarily logical, relying on economic arguments, technical details, and expert opinions. The speaker uses emotionally charged phrases such as "no to wind propaganda" and emphasizes the obligations owed to the public.
2025-05-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting.
The first speaker adopts an inquisitive and procedural tone, seeking clarity regarding the boundaries of the official's discretionary authority. The second speaker's style is highly combative, ideological, and cautionary, employing sharp rhetoric such as "chaos" and "dangerous precedent." The appeal targets both logic (the rule of law) and emotion (the disintegration of social order), vehemently stressing the necessity of resisting ideology.
2025-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is serious and inquisitive, using logical argumentation based on specific journalistic references. The speaker poses troubling rhetorical questions to emphasize the perceived threat to democratic values. The tone is formal, addressing the minister directly.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative, emotional, and accusatory, employing strong ideological language ("green ideology," "electricity production colony"). It appeals directly to the concerns and experiences of rural residents, combining these appeals with technical and economic arguments to demonstrate the illogic and unfairness of the proposed bill. Opponents are directly accused of lying and "talking nonsense."
2025-05-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and direct, using the forms of address "respected chairman of the session" and "dear minister." The speaker relies on logical arguments and data (statistics, a document written in black and white), posing critical and scrutinizing questions. The tone is skeptical, especially when challenging the assertions made by the commission's representative.
2025-04-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and direct, employing emotionally charged words ("astonished," "ignorance") to describe the actions taken by the representatives of the Electoral Commission. The speaker poses a question to a colleague to confirm their negative impression and establish a shared critical narrative.
2025-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and demanding, posing direct and accusatory questions to the minister. Rhetorical questions are used to cast doubt on the ministry's intentions and seriousness, hinting at a cynical attitude ("Is it not the case that we should just take the money from the simple-minded?").
2025-04-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and argumentative, yet simultaneously forceful and occasionally confrontational, especially on the topic of energy security. Logical appeals and sharp contrasts are employed (national interests versus ideological slogans), conveying astonishment that the speaker must address matters that are essentially self-evident. The speaker uses rhetorical questions and emphasizes that schools, hospitals, and industry cannot operate in the dark.
2025-04-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and analytical, posing a question to the rapporteur during the plenary session. The speaker employs logical argumentation to challenge the nature of the tax, asking directly whether it constitutes a property tax rather than an environmental fee.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and critical, emphasizing the seriousness and urgency of the situation (people are becoming refugees in their own homes). Logical arguments are used, pointing to the lack of regulations and the backwardness of science, supported by emotional examples (families in Saarde municipality). Strong comparisons and metaphors are employed, such as equating the effect of infrasound with carbon monoxide or radioactivity, and assessment based purely on expert opinions is criticized as "living in the Middle Ages."
2025-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is combative and sharply critical, employing emotional and condemnatory phrases (e.g., "yet another embarrassing situation," "the European mud league"). The speaker relies on ideological and value-based appeals (competence versus ideology), utilizing a sports analogy to underscore the injustice. The tone is formal, yet aggressive regarding the government's actions.
2025-04-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, addressing the question to the chairman of the session and the minister. The tone is critical and urgent, stressing the gravity of the issue and demanding answers from the government. A logical appeal is utilized, based on data concerning financial losses.
2025-03-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetoric is challenging and demanding, centering on concrete examples and the insistence upon accountability. The speaker employs formal address ("respected chair of the session," "dear minister") but subsequently poses sharp and specific questions. The objective is to clarify complex situations for the public, stressing the necessity of providing "real-life examples."
2025-03-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The tone is predominantly critical, accusatory, and insistent, employing strong emotional appeals and emphasizing that the money was taken from "pensioners, families, and small entrepreneurs." The speaker levels sharp accusations regarding a lack of transparency, corruption, and a "Wild West" situation. Vivid analogies are used (supporting a hotel chain, cutting down a tree just to get a checker piece), and journalistic investigations (the Õhtuleht article) are referenced to substantiate the arguments.
2025-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is predominantly interrogative, confrontational, and sharply critical, including an ironic element, referring to "a small comical element." The speaker employs both logical appeals (demanding figures and practical examples) and emotional accusations, charging the opposing side with discrimination and displacement activity.
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, emotional, and accusatory, particularly when addressing the issue of reservists. Strong emotional appeals are employed ("it is embarrassing to listen to this"), alongside direct accusations of lacking willpower and capability ("there is no will, there is no capability"). The speaker concludes with a rhetorical question and an open expression of distrust regarding the presenter's promises.
2025-03-17
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is serious, insistent, and strongly critical, particularly regarding the demographic crisis, employing emotional appeals focused on the nation's survival. The speaker demands concrete measures and strategic leadership, contrasting this with the government's "superficial development plans" and "empty promises." The style is formal and centers on institutional responsibility and constitutional obligations.
2025-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The style is formal, interrogative, and challenging, employing the salutations "Esteemed Session Chair" and "Dear Presenter." The speaker primarily relies on logical and statistical appeals, presenting official data (the number of deaths per week) and demanding clarification regarding a potential cause-and-effect relationship. The tone is serious and concerned, calling the official narrative into question.
2025-03-12
The 15th Riigikogu, fifth sitting, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, focusing on the clarification of specific details and conditions. The tone is skeptical and demanding, particularly regarding environmental risks, appealing to logic and the necessity of evidence-based answers. Emotional appeals are absent; the emphasis is placed on political oversight and demanding accountability.
2025-03-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The tone is sharply critical, accusatory, and deeply concerned, particularly towards the government and officials who evade accountability. The text employs both logical arguments (the commission's tasks/mandate) and emotional appeals (the evaporation of taxpayer funds, injustice). The speaker stresses the necessity of a shift in political culture, demanding that decisions be followed by responsibility, and repeatedly references earlier scandals (Tallinn Port, Autorollo) to demonstrate a recurring pattern.
2025-02-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, aggressive, and direct, utilizing rhetorical questions and explicit accusations of lying ("Who is lying then?"). The speaker demands concrete data and analyses, calling into question the credibility of both the prime minister and the minister. The tone is formal, yet intensely confrontational.
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is highly formal, respectful, and focused on questions, utilizing standard forms of address such as "Respected Chairman of the Session! Dear Presenter/Minister!". The speaker poses logical and detailed questions, seeking to identify the risks, limitations, and potential inequalities associated with the implementation of the draft legislation, while avoiding emotional appeals.
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet simultaneously passionate and compelling, employing strong nationalistic and security-focused appeals. The speaker uses rhetorical questions (Why should citizens of foreign nations be the ones to decide?) and stresses the themes of loyalty and responsibility. The speech concludes with a patriotic rallying cry ("Long live Estonia!"), which underscores the emotional bond with the audience.
2025-02-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, emotional, and forceful, especially when addressing local government issues. Strong metaphors and accusations are employed, labeling the developers' activities as "extortion and mafia." The emotional appeal is amplified by dramatic rhetorical questions that allude to the forced sale of social facilities (school buildings, nursing homes).
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and confrontational, blending statistical data with sharp personal attacks. Figurative language is employed, notably calling the Prime Minister a "wind energy salesman," alongside moral condemnation, accusing the government of sexism and humiliation. The tone is urgent and demanding, casting doubt on the government's competence to lead the country.
2025-01-28
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing both the presiding officer and the Minister. The address is logic-based and direct, focusing on the demand for specific quantitative information regarding the necessity of the proposed legislative amendment.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, employing a rhetorical question to emphasize the perceived injustice ("Doesn't this seem unfair...?"). The speech is formal and based on logical contrast (subsidies versus taxation), highlighting the policy's inconsistency and unfair impact.
2025-01-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and question-focused, employing polite forms of address ("Esteemed Presiding Officer," "Dear Presenter"). The speaker puts forward sharp, logic-based demands (definitions, impact assessments), strictly avoiding emotional or personal appeals.
2025-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is polite and formal, respectfully addressing the chairman of the session and the presenter, and expressing gratitude for the comprehensive report. The rhetoric is analytical and focused on questions, with the goal of determining the feasibility of the draft legislation and the government's alternative plans. The tone is measured and information-seeking, rather than confrontational.
2025-01-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style of discourse is formal, persuasive, and critical, employing strong moral and logical appeals. The necessity of transparency is emphasized by contrasting the current secrecy with behavior characteristic of undemocratic nations. The logical argumentation is supported by comparisons between the expense compensation system for Riigikogu members and Nordic standards.
2025-01-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, substantive, and analytical, focusing on logical arguments and the presentation of technical details. The speaker employs the debunking of myths (e.g., cheap renewable energy) and raises pressing questions regarding the assurance of stability. The tone is formal, addressing the respected chair of the session and the minister, while demanding concrete solutions to mitigate price volatility.
2024-12-19
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style of the speech is highly informative, humorous, and festive, utilizing the figure of Santa Claus and the context of a gift presentation. Although the tone is light and conversational, it incorporates political symbolism (a reference to gender neutrality and the EKRE party). The speaker employs emotional and cultural appeals.
2024-12-18
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, but in a lengthy speech, it becomes highly critical and cautionary, employing an urgent tone. Strong emotional appeals are utilized (health risks, environmental devastation) alongside figurative language to paint a negative picture of Estonia as a "massive power plant" and a "tangle of high-voltage power lines." The argumentation is a blend of political value criticism and the presentation of technical concerns.
2024-12-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, condemnatory, and emotional, employing strong ideological analogies (communism, planned economy) and cautionary language. Rhetorical questions and exaggerations are used (e.g., hiring homosexual leaders to avoid a fine), and appeals are made to the listeners' sense of shame or compassion. The discourse is direct and emphasizes ideological conflict.
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style of communication is formal and analytical, focusing on facts and logical clarity. When asking questions, the speaker quotes the presenter directly from the transcript to ensure precision and avoid misinterpretation. The tone is neutral and businesslike, aimed solely at obtaining information.
2024-12-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is insistent and critical, frequently employing words such as "crisis," "irresponsible," and "essential" to underscore the gravity of the situation. He/She balances logical appeals (statistical data) with emotional appeals, referring to the threat of national decline and the fears of local residents. Numerous rhetorical questions are used to call the government's actions into question.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speaker adopts a critical and insistent style, focusing on logical arguments regarding economic and administrative consequences. Rhetorical questions are employed to underscore the deficiencies of the draft bill and urge a more balanced approach. The tone remains formal and analytical, stressing the danger posed to the business environment and public well-being.
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speaker's rhetorical style is serious, pressing, and emotionally charged, emphasizing moral obligation and the vulnerability of children. They employ a logical structure (problem introduction, statistical evidence, ethical questions), but primarily appeal to the listeners' conscience, using phrases such as "Every child is worth their weight in gold." During the Q&A session, they are direct and insistent, demanding a clear answer from the minister.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, critical, and focused on logic, avoiding emotional appeals. The speaker raises pointed questions regarding the absence of an impact analysis and adopts a didactic tone toward the presenter, recommending they consult the PPA website. The emphasis is placed on highlighting procedural errors and deficiencies in the drafting of the bill.
2024-11-12
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, critical, and highly interrogative, using direct questions to challenge the presenter's motives and cast doubt on the coalition's credibility. The tone is skeptical, particularly concerning the centralization of power in the hands of a single party.
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and persuasive, combining logical arguments (EU harmonization, economic benefit) with philosophical and emotional appeals. Emphasis is placed on valuing and ensuring the well-being of employees, referencing Tammsaare and the common deathbed regrets concerning overwork. The tone is generally positive, focusing on the advantages of the draft bill.
2024-11-06
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and intensely interrogative, presenting the Prime Minister with a series of detailed questions regarding the transparency of procedures and decisions. The tone is demanding and critical, underscoring the necessity for accountability and clarity. The follow-up question is aimed at obtaining precise confirmation of the Prime Minister's previous response.
2024-11-05
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The style is formal, respectful, and professional, addressing both the presiding officer of the session and the Prime Minister. The rhetoric is purely logical and informative, focusing on a specific political inquiry concerning developments and organizational changes. Emotional or personal appeals are completely absent.
2024-11-04
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is confrontational and accusatory, using a specific and scandalous story from a journalistic investigation as the basis for the political attack. The issue raised is direct and intense, aimed at calling into question the moral authority of the minister and the coalition. The rhetoric relies on an emotional and moral appeal.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and confrontational, especially during the debate on the motion of no confidence, where extensive documentation regarding the opponent's personal insults is utilized. The style is a blend of procedural skepticism and direct emotional attack, culminating in the question, "What is wrong with you?" The tone is formal, but the substance is highly personal and accusatory, emphasizing the ministers' unethical conduct and the disregard shown toward parliament.
2024-10-22
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, but it becomes extremely critical and combative when expressing opposition. Strong imagery is used, such as "tsunami of massive bureaucracy" and "absurd requirements," emphasizing both logical appeals (costs) and emotional appeals (injustice). In the lengthy speech, entrepreneurs watching the broadcast are addressed directly to explain the negative impact of the new requirements.
2024-10-21
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is challenging and skeptical, posing direct questions to the minister regarding the foundations of the policy ("What makes you think Estonia can handle this?"). The argumentation relies on a logical appeal, citing international failures and risks stemming from differences in legal norms. The tone is formal, addressing the respected Chairman of the session and the Minister.
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and procedural, posing questions to both the minister and the committee rapporteur. The appeals are purely logical and fact-based, emphasizing the minister's inability to answer the question.
2024-10-15
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet sharply critical and skeptical, using direct address to the minister to pose questions. The speaker uses rhetorical questions to call the minister’s justifications into question and push them to extreme conclusions, such as the theme of the collapse of the market economy.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and at times emotional, employing strong judgments such as "unprecedented and cruel." The focus is on logical appeals, specifically highlighting the lack of consequence and impact analyses, while demanding concrete answers from the minister. The questions themselves are direct and demanding, pointing out issues that have been left unanswered.
2024-10-09
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is urgent and sharply critical, aimed especially at the government and the Reform Party, who are accused of lacking interest in children's welfare. Both logical arguments (statistical data) and emotional appeals are utilized, pointing to the opponents' negative attitude toward childbearing and families. The speaker uses examples (e.g., a neighbor’s decision to have a third child with the help of subsidies) to emphasize the effectiveness of the support measures.
2024-10-07
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, demanding, and direct, focusing on demanding accountability. The speaker contrasts the minister's "optimism" with the facts concerning the road maintenance debt and demands concrete plans. Sharp language is used, accusing the minister of "boasting and talking big for no reason."
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is very formal and respectful, addressing the minister politely ("Dear Minister!"). The focus is on logical and fact-based questions, demanding detailed explanations and clarification of legal terminology, while avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and cautionary, employing strong metaphors such as the "invasion of wind farms" and "actual turbine forests." A balance is struck between emotional arguments (the destruction of the living environment, health risks) and logical arguments (subsidies, real estate prices) to underscore the dangers posed by wind energy. The speaker requested extra time to present their viewpoint, which suggests a desire to cover the topic thoroughly.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is urgent, anxious, and at times highly confrontational, stressing the danger of population extinction if measures are not taken. It utilizes both detailed statistical arguments and strong emotional appeals, connecting the issue of birth rates to constitutional duty. Criticism aimed at the government is sharp, labeling it "anti-family" and referencing the opponents' cynical remarks regarding motherhood.
2024-09-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, press briefing.
The style of discourse is critical, accusatory, and interrogative, employing strong terms such as "arbitrariness" and "display of full authority." The appeal is a blend of legal referencing (the Constitution) and a political attack against the government's decision-making procedures. The tone is demanding and suspicious, particularly regarding upcoming confiscation plans.
2024-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong metaphors (e.g., "building a Potemkin village") and emotional descriptions (e.g., "an immeasurably horrifying mire"). The speaker demands concrete answers and data from the ministers, but presents their arguments with high intensity, accusing the opposing side of lacking ideas, being complacent, and showing incompetence. Opponents are repeatedly labeled as "green transition proponents."
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful in its addresses ("esteemed chairman of the session," "dear subject of the no-confidence motion"), but the content itself is sharp and confrontational. It employs direct, probing questions that highlight political discord and demand factual clarification.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is analytical, critical, and formal, focusing on logical arguments and economic data. Direct and sharp criticism is employed regarding the government's and the prime minister's lack of economic understanding. The tone is urgent, warning that a country cannot be made wealthy through taxation.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, yet simultaneously sharp and accusatory, leveling direct and critical questions at the prime ministerial candidate. The tone is concerned and demanding, highlighting the scale of the budget crisis and the government's failures. Logical appeals are employed, focusing on facts and demanding accountability.
2024-07-15
15th Riigikogu, Extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and question-focused, being directed at the Chairman of the Finance Committee. The speaker employs a logical appeal, emphasizing the contradiction between the tax's objectives and its actual implementation, while avoiding emotional expressions.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and question-driven, utilizing facts known from the media (e.g., the Bolt directive, Ossinovski's corruption suspicions) to pressure the opponent. The goal is to expose ethical inconsistency and the government's internal weakness by posing direct questions regarding lobbying and favors.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is informative, serious, and cautionary, focusing on logical arguments and the presentation of technical details. The speaker employs an evidence-based approach, referencing studies by German scientists and the legislation of other countries (Germany, Great Britain) to highlight the dangers of the draft bill. The tone is formal and focuses on facts, not emotional appeals.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing
The style is formal and direct, addressing the session chair and the minister respectfully. Repetitive and clarifying questioning is used ("everything has been eliminated, all system failures have been eliminated by today") to compel the minister to provide an unambiguous answer. The tone is analytical and demanding.
2024-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is insistent and defensive, emphasizing the critical importance of the survival of the Estonian language and the nation-state. It employs both logical arguments (referencing laws and data from the Language Inspectorate) and emotional appeals, directly linking the language issue to a security risk and a lawless situation. The final message presents a stark choice: either enforce the use of Estonian or accept the decline of the nation-state.
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, employing the salutations "Esteemed Chairman/Minister of the Riigikogu." The speaker poses pointed, yet neutral questions, aimed at highlighting political contradictions and verifying the facts regarding the security situation. The tone is analytical and serious, focusing on logical argumentation.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, addressing esteemed officials (the Director, the Chairman, the Vice-Chairman). Although the tone is courteous, the question is sharp in substance and procedurally critical, emphasizing the logical rationale for why a certain step was omitted.
2024-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is confrontational and accusatory, using direct questions that point to the minister's failure. Although the address is formal ("respected"), the content is sharp and critical, accusing the prime minister of laughing at the teachers.
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, employing direct and pointed questions when addressing the minister. The tone is procedural and logical, concentrating on the absence of facts and methodology underpinning the draft legislation, while strictly avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-04-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal and direct, respectfully addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the President of the Bank of Estonia. The tone is critical and challenging, using the opponent's claim (that climate goals boost the economy) to emphasize the reality of economic failure.
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and accusatory, employing strong expressions such as "a disgrace" and labeling the system "a savage variant." The appeals are a blend of logical argumentation (referencing scientists, technical errors, and vote tallies) and emotional distrust directed at the system administrators. The speaker maintains a formal demeanor, yet utilizes sharp political and personal accusations regarding the issue of lacking trust.
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and direct, posing very specific and personal questions to the minister regarding the conflict of interest. Logical arguments are employed, citing an external expert opinion (attorney Mart Parind) and previous court rulings to underscore the severity of the situation. Furthermore, procedural intervention is utilized to broaden the minister's scope of responsibility (due to serving as acting prime minister).
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the presiding officer and the minister respectfully. Critical rhetorical questions are employed ("Why has this not been specified here...?"), intended to highlight deficiencies in the strategy and the unfair allocation of priorities. The tone is one of concern and demands clarification.
2024-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, procedural, and critical, posing challenging questions structured as a formal inquiry. The tone is one of concern and appeals directly to logic, focusing specifically on procedural deficiencies (the absence of involvement and analysis) and potential negative repercussions (irreversible damage). The subsequent follow-up question is straightforward and clarifying.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal and interrogative, addressing both the rapporteur and the session chair. Logical argumentation is employed (if it can be done without, then it is not essential), and in the second speech, the tone turns critical when challenging the violation of procedural rules (inappropriate comments and giggling) concerning the discussion of the Estonian language.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, third sitting, information briefing
The style is formal and direct, posing a question that demands clarification from the Prime Minister via the presiding officer of the session. The tone is analytical, focusing on requiring logical justification for the government's political assertions.
2024-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical, confrontational, and demanding, especially concerning ministerial accountability and social policy issues. Strong emotional appeals are utilized (e.g., "shocked," "appalling") when addressing school violence and child safety. The speaker poses direct questions aimed at assessing the minister's decisions and moral authority.
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, formal, and interrogative, addressing the presenter directly. The tone is one of concern, focusing on the potential negative future consequences of political decisions (the speed of reform), such as poor quality instruction. Logical argumentation is employed, rather than emotional appeals.
2024-04-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and interrogative, addressing the Session Chair and the Minister respectfully. The speaker employs logical argumentation, relying on specific details from the explanatory memorandum in order to achieve clarity on issues concerning consumers. The tone is demanding of information and moderately critical.
2024-04-01
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and question-focused, addressing the respected session chair and the rapporteur. The tone is analytical and critical, demanding explanations from the government concerning political decisions and the measures implemented. The appeals are primarily logical, focusing on the specific details of the policy.
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical and, at times, combative, employing both detailed legal argumentation (referencing the ambiguity between the procedural bodies/regulators and the developers) and emotional, value-based appeals (e.g., undermining the rule of law). Comparisons are used (expense compensations versus doping) and historical parallels are drawn (setting utopian goals akin to Soviet party programs) to emphasize the gravity of the situation.
2024-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is critical and concerned, especially regarding demographic issues, where existential and emotional language is employed ("The Estonian people are dying out"). Analogies are used (the "nudging" of the car tax versus the "nudging" of families) to highlight the immorality of the government's actions. Although the questions are formally presented, they contain sharp political controversy.
2024-03-12
15th Riigikogu, 3rd plenary sitting
The speaker adopts a formal and respectful style when addressing the chair and the rapporteur, but the substance of the speech is sharp and questioning. Direct and personal references are made to political opponents (Kaja Kallas) to emphasize the need to scrutinize the backgrounds of government members. The emphasis lies on posing logical and procedural questions designed to expose inconsistencies.
2024-03-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and accusatory, posing direct questions aimed at the government. A logical appeal is employed, connecting the government's official rationale (environmental impacts, climate warming) to alleged negative consequences (ethnic decline, discouraging large families/childbearing). The speaker demands that the opposing party acknowledge their failure to halt the sanctions.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker’s rhetorical style is formal, respectfully addressing both the session chairman and the presenter. At the same time, when social topics are discussed, heavily charged and emotional associations are utilized, specifically linking the burqa to bloodthirsty extremists. Anecdotal examples are also used (such as the woman with a muffin on the Tallink ferry) to illustrate the viewpoints, thereby balancing the logical and emotional appeals.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The speaking style is formal, direct, and analytical, relying on logical arguments and concrete statistical data. The speaker poses pointed questions to the minister and the presenter, demanding explanations and action plans, utilizing data rather than emotional appeals.
2024-03-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is predominantly critical and questioning, combining logical appeal (economic data) with sharp sarcasm and hyperbole. The speaker uses irony to criticize the Reform Party's environmental policy, referencing the desire to take Estonia "50 years back" and inquiring about erecting a whipping post near the Riigikogu (Parliament). The tone is formal, but clearly oppositional.
2024-02-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on logical arguments and political theory. The speaker uses a concrete example (the Centre Party) to illustrate broader political phenomena. The overall tone is measured and rather reflective than emotionally charged.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, employing standard forms of address for the session chair and the presenter. The tone becomes urgent and critical when addressing integration and language issues, where strong language is used, such as "absurd waste of taxpayers' money." Both economic and security-based arguments are presented.
2024-02-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and courteous in addressing the session chairman and the presenter, yet sharp and critical in substance. A rhetorical question is employed, coupled with the assumption that a scandal of such a high caliber must have had an impact, thereby underscoring the necessity of accountability. The tone is probing and demanding.
2024-02-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is urgent, critical, and alarming, emphasizing the security threat and the government's inaction ("the bomb is already ticking," "the state is still in a dormant state"). It uses strong imagery (Estonia as a "secret entrance to Europe") and balances emotional appeals (social catastrophe) with factual data and international comparisons. It concludes with a direct call to support the bill.
2024-02-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and deferential, directed toward the session chair and the Prime Minister. The speaker adopts a direct and interrogative tone, making a logical appeal for the investigation of a potential causal relationship.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, neutral, and explanatory, focusing on the logical presentation of the goals and expected outcomes of the proposals. The tone is factual and informative, avoiding emotional appeals. Addresses are brief and focus on the economic justification of the legislative bills.
2024-01-23
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The speaker's style is formal, polite, and interrogative, utilizing standard forms of address ("respected Chairman of the Session," "dear Prime Minister"). The emphasis is on framing the question logically and based on details, presenting both factual inquiries and ethical considerations. Emotional appeals are not used; the focus remains on requesting information and viewpoints.
2024-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical and forceful, combining logical arguments (inflation, loan interest rates) with emotional appeals (the hardships faced by pensioners). Figurative and cautionary language is employed to underscore the consequences of shoddy renovation work, labeling them "mushroom farms" and "green mold."
2024-01-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is very brief, formal, and factual. The speaker uses standard forms of address ("Esteemed Chairman of the Session," "Dear colleagues") and focuses on the logical appeal, explaining the purpose and content of the draft law without emotional embellishment.
2024-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is skeptical, aggressive, and combative, employing strong accusations and rhetorical questions. Sharp and emotional language is used (e.g., "circus," "hypocritical"), along with references to the "Stark-Logistics Government" to emphasize hidden business interests and the true objective of the bill. The argumentation relies on both procedural deficiencies and logical objections (e.g., transporting water to Viimsi just to water the grass).
2024-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The speaker's style is formal and direct, employing standard forms of address ("Thank you, respected Chair of the session!"). Sharp and provocative questions are utilized, aimed at exposing the weak points of the government's policy, particularly concerning morality and national security. The questions tend to incorporate logical and ethical appeals.
2024-01-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and interrogative, respectfully addressing the presiding officer and the presenter. The speaker utilizes questions to highlight the system's deficiencies and the lack of awareness among citizens. The rhetoric balances personal experience ("As a mother, I know") with logical argumentation on the topic of gender inequality.
2024-01-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, employing sharp and accusatory language when addressing matters of value. The government's actions are heavily criticized, using phrases such as "completely unacceptable," "dividing society," and "forcing [measures] through using strong-arm tactics." The argumentation relies on both procedural sources (the long waiting time for the inquiry) and legal sources (a reference to the European Court of Human Rights).