By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder
Total Sessions: 97
Fully Profiled: 97
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The speaker's style is analytical and formal, focusing on the substance of the law and its procedures, noting that the bill under discussion is not revolutionary. He employs logical arguments, stressing the necessity of statesmanship and political will to implement meaningful changes. The tone is serious and pertinent, urging colleagues to incorporate substantive amendments into the draft legislation.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is provocative and aggressive, beginning with the accusation that the opposing side is engaging in provocation and demanding explanations. The speaker uses direct questions and quotes the opposing side's previous promises (a quote from the prime minister) to highlight the political contradiction and demand that the government clarify the source of its strong mandate.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and accusatory, employing strong metaphors (e.g., "crippled car tax," "hurdy-gurdy"). The speaker emphasizes logical argumentation based on economic damage but also uses emotional language, accusing the responses of demagoguery and the minister of unpreparedness. He repeatedly asks the Prime Minister not to use worn-out answers ("about the tax hump and teachers' salaries").
2025-10-06
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The tone is predominantly combative, critical, and procedurally demanding. It employs sharp language (e.g., "dodging the issue," "stifling this discussion") and accuses the opposing side of incompetence and errors in managing the session. It focuses on logical and procedural criticism, demanding concrete answers.
2025-09-24
15th Estonian Parliament, 6th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive and accusatory, employing strong negative terminology such as "stupidity," "cancer," and "disarray." The speaker puts forward logical demands (impact assessments, financial schemes), but delivers them in a highly intense tone, repeatedly calling into question the competence of the prime minister and the government.
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
The style is serious, formal, and persuasive, aiming to secure parliamentary support for the draft legislation. The text employs both logical arguments (voting results, legal expertise) and urgent appeals (to act judiciously, to de-escalate tensions), emphasizing the priority of national security. The speaker utilizes legal terminology and references external expert assessment.
2025-09-17
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, press briefing.
The style is predominantly formal, and questions are posed logically, demanding a clear action plan and the securing of resources from the government. He/She employs a rhetorical device, agreeing with the Prime Minister that the quality of questions during the information session is superior to the quality of the answers, thereby hinting at criticism directed towards the government. Furthermore, he/she presents a procedural and ironic question concerning telepathic phenomena within the Riigikogu chamber.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and fact-based, presenting a list of the predecessor's specific failures and contradictions. The speech is structured as an extract of responses, culminating in a politically charged question regarding the party's internal unity. Repetition and parallel structures are used to intensify the criticism.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, press briefing
The style is respectful, beginning with an acknowledgment of the session chair's framing of the topic ("understandable and clear"), but becomes firm and categorical when defending one's own position ("Absolutely not"). The rhetoric is logical and relies on personal long-term experience to justify flexibility in the posing of questions.
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The style is critical and argumentative, employing both logical appeals (constitutionality, competition) and emotional emphasis (harm, unreasonableness). The speaker uses contrasts ("a radically opposite step") and provides concrete examples (Leie HLÜ) to support their position. Additionally, the speaker is procedurally demanding, criticizing the inflexibility of the session chair and the ministers' disrespect toward parliament.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, forceful, and formal, particularly when addressing the Board of the Riigikogu, accusing them of "flagrant violation" of the law and "abuse of power." It appeals strongly to logic and legal statutes, demanding clear references to specific laws and detailed explanations. While expressing indignation and "embarrassment" over the quality of the legislative process, it consistently maintains a focus on legal argumentation.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is critical and direct, expressing confusion regarding the minister's approach and labeling it a "sorting frenzy." Logical arguments are employed concerning efficiency, costs, and environmental sustainability, calling into question the government's understanding of local government organization. In the third speech, the tone is resolute, defending their linguistic and procedural choices.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is predominantly analytical and procedural, but occasionally becomes sharp and combative, especially when criticizing the commission's interpretations and the coalition's actions. It employs rhetorical questions and cautionary metaphors ("the theatrical performance of lowering kindergarten fees," "the society of evil conspirators"). The appeals are primarily directed toward the principles of the rule of law, strategic foresight, and long-term thinking.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker's style is critical and analytical, using logical and historical arguments to underscore the lack of foresight. He/She employs sharp language, criticizing the "naive and short-sighted national defense policy" and the "culture of malice" that has emerged within the ERJK. Although the tone is formal, it is also reactive at times, as the speaker took the floor following the prompting of previous speakers.
2025-06-02
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, addressing the Minister of Finance politely yet directly. The speaker employs a logical appeal, presenting a specific budgetary contradiction (planned expensive electricity versus the actual favorable price) and demanding an explanation for it.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The style is predominantly critical and confrontational, particularly on issues of economic and security policy, employing judgments such as "very short-sighted." He/She poses many direct questions to ministers and commission representatives, demanding clarification regarding the absence of government arguments. There is also one procedural, slightly awkward question concerning the rapporteur's temporary absence.
2025-05-19
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The style is critical, analytical, and matter-of-fact, expressing deep concern (e.g., "My heart aches over this") regarding strategic resources. The speaker employs logical arguments, referencing historical facts and criticizing government responses as "slogan-driven" and "propagandistic." The focus is on details and long-term consequences, rather than emotions.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly formal, argumentative, and confident, focusing on issues related to the rule of law and procedural matters. The speaker adopts a defensive posture, rejecting accusations of deliberate and malicious conduct, and employs logical appeals, stressing that the principle of the rule of law does not mean arguing at any cost. He uses sharp contrasts, referencing colleagues' "surprisingly great faith" in the president's justice.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, fifth sitting, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and demanding, focusing on government accountability and transparency. The speaker employs direct questioning, quotes statements made by the opposing side (Jürgen Ligi's "sheep"), and accuses the Prime Minister of selective criticism. The argumentation is logical and relies on official data (the National Audit Office), contrasting sharply with the government's reliance on mere slogans.
2025-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is critical, substantive, and exacting, emphasizing institutional propriety. Direct questions and strong warnings regarding the peril of setting a precedent are employed, underpinned by logical argumentation concerning the fulfillment of the minister's duties.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is direct, skeptical, and demands a clear answer to sensitive political questions. The tone is formal, as is typical for parliament, but contains a sharp and personal note, referencing rumors circulating in the chamber ("Colleagues here in the chamber are talking").
2025-04-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is defensive and argumentative, beginning with an emotional claim about undeserved chastisement ("was repeatedly punished here"). The speaker focuses on logical counter-arguments and exposing the half-truths or misleading nature of political claims (e.g., the claim made by colleague Aab). The tone is formal, yet contains sharp criticism.
2025-04-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, direct, and interrogative, addressing the minister respectfully. The speaker presents their questions logically and structurally ("two simple questions"), focusing on data-driven and rational information gathering, without emotional appeals.
2025-04-09
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, information briefing
The tone is sharp, critical, and demanding, emphasizing the government's "misguided policy" and confusing messaging. It utilizes logical appeals, relying on facts and official forecasts, and presents repetitive and detailed questions to compel the government toward clarity. The style is formal, but contains pointed assessments of the government's actions.
2025-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and at times accusatory, employing strong judgments (e.g., "they punish people with the car tax," "unreasonably"). The speaker poses questions that already contain a critical stance and emphasizes adherence to sound parliamentary practice and proper work organization. The tone is formal yet demanding, focusing on logical arguments and procedural correctness.
2025-03-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is informative and personal, utilizing Estonian folk wisdom ("God grants the job, He also grants the sense") to acknowledge a colleague. The tone is light and ironic, incorporating self-irony regarding the intelligence that supposedly comes with the position.
2025-03-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The tone of the speech is very serious, formal, and urgent, emphasizing that this is an "historic moment and choice." The appeal is primarily logical and fact-based, relying on security analysis (war near the borders) and legal justification (it is impossible to resolve without amending the constitution). Figurative expressions are used, such as "an inside-out sunrise or sunset" when describing the compromise, and the audience is urged to vote according to their conscience.
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is critical, demanding, and detailed, focusing on logical arguments and the listing of specific shortcomings in the form of questions. The speaker uses sharp language, labeling the Prime Minister's self-identification with the state as "megalomania." Furthermore, he demands that the chair call the Prime Minister to order for misrepresenting the opposition's positions.
2025-03-12
The 15th Riigikogu, fifth sitting, information briefing.
The style in the first speech is sharply confrontational and emotionally charged, utilizing phrases such as "tax war" and "terrible bureaucracy." In the second speech, the tone shifts to formal, and the questions are aimed at clarifying specific numerical targets (a 20% reduction of officials) and agreements (R&D funding). Sarcasm is employed when referring to the Prime Minister’s "glorious shared history" in leading Nordica into bankruptcy.
2025-03-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is sharp, ironic, and aggressive, employing emotionally charged words like "chaos" and "disorder" to describe the government's actions. The speaker uses sarcasm, referencing the prime minister's acknowledgment of mistakes ("the more you err, the more human you are"), to underscore the intensity of their criticism.
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker's style is forceful and logical, employing strong judgments (e.g., "stupidity," "an outright lie") when criticizing the opposition. He relies on security arguments, international ramifications, and constitutional logic to substantiate his position. Simultaneously, he urges his colleagues to vote according to their personal conscience and better judgment, rather than adhering to party discipline.
2025-02-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style is critical, direct, and at times combative, particularly when addressing government inaction and issues of injustice (the car tax). The speaker demands logical and calculated answers, employing rhetorical questions and strong language, such as "the wicked plan of officials" and "perverse regional policy." The appeal targets both logic (the requirement for a comprehensive solution in the energy sector) and emotion (punishing rural residents via the car tax).
2025-02-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary meeting
The style in the first speech is predominantly formal, technical, and logical, focusing on explanations and refuting the government's remarks using pragmatic arguments. In the second speech, the tone becomes sharp and combative, employing an emotionally charged and derogatory phrase ("handwritten scribble") to criticize the foundations of the government's energy policy.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly critical, accusatory, and insistent, especially when describing the government's activities, using expressions like "ligadi-logadi, killadi-kolladi" [higgledy-piggledy, slapdash]. Both logical arguments (interpretation of the rules of procedure, the message from allies) and emotional appeals (saving money at the expense of pensioners and children with special educational needs) are utilized. The speaker employs rhetorical questions and sharp retorts, accusing the government of making "troika-style" decisions before the debate even begins.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, information briefing
The speaker adopts a highly critical and combative style, particularly when addressing the Prime Minister’s accusations, employing phrases such as "extremely serious accusation" and "megalomania." He supports his logical arguments with detailed financial data, but also incorporates emotional and figurative appeals, notably comparing the planning of wind energy to "the Kilplased carrying light in a bag."
2025-01-29
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th sitting, information briefing
The language used is formal, critical, and demanding, employing emotionally charged terms such as "disorder/chaos" and "to force happiness upon others." The emphasis lies on logical and legal argumentation, directly questioning whether specific behavior is "culturally correct and also substantively sound" and compliant with the law.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is critical, direct, and argumentative, presenting a direct challenge to the presiding officer's interpretation. Although the argumentation is legal and refers to the law, emotional terms such as "false," "unjust," and "creates additional tensions" are also used to emphasize the seriousness of the situation. The speaker is formal and focuses on logical persuasion through law and precedent.
2025-01-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The tone is extremely critical, serious, and urgent, describing the situation as a matter of national survival and expressing "deep concern." Both emotional (sense of security) and logical arguments are employed, highlighting specific government measures that are painful for families. The speaker uses repetition and emphasis ("not a single syllable!") and challenges the minister to present a positive program.
2024-12-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing
The speaker's rhetorical style is highly critical and at times sharp, using strong phrases like "stupidity squared" and "utter stupidity." He presents his views using logical arguments and facts (such as the location of development centers), but delivers them with emotional conviction, demanding that the minister present accurate information. The tone is predominantly confrontational and accusatory, especially regarding the topic of regional policy.
2024-12-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and interrogative, employing rhetorical questions to underscore the gravity of the situation ("How have we arrived in such a situation?"). The appeal is strongly logical and relies on citing the evaluations of authorities (supervisory bodies) to lend weight to the critique.
2024-12-12
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal, polite, and inquisitive, addressing the rapporteur with respect. The focus is on a logical explanation, seeking to resolve the ambiguity that arose within the commission, without emotional or aggressive appeals.
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and procedurally demanding, conveying the sense that the opposition is "suppressed." Strong emotional language is employed (e.g., "utterly cynical," "forcibly linked"), and there is an emphasis on logical and legal correctness. The style is formal yet direct, focusing on procedural facts rather than storytelling.
2024-12-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth session, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and confrontational, accusing the government of political infighting and creating confusion. Logical appeals are employed, emphasizing the absence of concrete financial commitments and budgetary coverage. The style is formal, but includes strong judgments, such as "unreasonable conspiracy theory" and "incitement," along with quoting ("allow me to respectfully disagree").
2024-12-10
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, logic-based, and critical, focusing on the precise interpretation of laws and procedural rules. Direct questions are posed to the rapporteur and the government, demanding strict adherence to both content and form. Emotional dissatisfaction ("unhappy") is also expressed regarding the resulting procedural confusion.
2024-12-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session.
The tone is serious, analytical, and persuasive, highlighting the significance of the issue and the security threat it poses. It employs numerous logical and factual arguments, drawing upon statistics, legislative history, and direct quotes from the interior minister's statements. The style is formal and detailed, yet it also incorporates emotional assessments, referring to the current practice as a "crazy stance" and underscoring the dignity inherent in citizenship.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is combative, urgent, and sharply critical, especially concerning procedural matters, utilizing strong phrases such as "absurd justification," "blatant violation," and "into an insane situation." It consistently appeals to the law, transparency, and common sense, demanding accountability and clarity. The tone is formal, yet emotionally charged when he feels the opposition is being silenced.
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is extremely brief, formal, and repetitive, utilizing standard phrases such as "Thank you!" and "I request a vote on this amendment." The tone is neutral and procedural, without emotional appeals or complex linguistic structures.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is predominantly critical and forceful, employing strong metaphors (e.g., "Social Democrats' ears," "Brezhnev's package," "the final nail in the coffin") to characterize the coalition's actions. He combines legal argumentation (a logical appeal) with emotional calls for statesmanship and a sense of justice. While acknowledging the existence of risks, he remains optimistic about the possibility of finding common ground, urging coalition members to break free from their "chains."
2024-11-20
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is confrontational and critical, beginning with a direct reprimand of the prime minister for spreading context-free and false information. It employs strong emotional terms such as "hostages," "dictate," and "scare stories," while simultaneously relying on logical and historical arguments.
2024-11-18
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, accusatory, and insistent, employing powerful metaphors such as "tax carnival" and analogies involving a farmer sowing at the wrong time. The speaker maintains a formal demeanor but presents logical arguments, focusing on procedural and ethical violations, and demands that the Prime Minister acknowledge these errors.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The style is resolute, critical, and at times highly confrontational, employing strong language such as "violent and malicious interpretation" and referencing legal violations that occur "as a chain reaction." The speaker primarily appeals to logic and legality, repeatedly demanding a vote and protesting against unfair proceedings. While longer speeches are structured and analytical, the overall tone remains one of concern and protest.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, information briefing
The tone is urgent, combative, and highly critical, employing strong metaphors such as "a specter is roaming around Estonia" and labeling the activity "foolish displacement activity." The appeals blend logic (administrative rationale, historical division) and emotional pressure, demanding the minister halt the action. The style remains formal, yet it contains sharp accusations directed at the officials.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The speaking style is highly confrontational and aggressive, including direct accusations of deliberate stalling and obstruction. Personal and dramatic elements are employed, for example, declaring oneself "at least twice as smart" as the minister and describing the work of the parliament as a "strange performance." The tone is formally polite ("Honorable Minister"), but the content is sharply critical and emotional.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is confrontational and procedurally correct, though sharp in substance, given that the prime minister is being accused of repeatedly disseminating false information. The speaker attempts to remain courteous but employs strong accusations ("is spreading misinformation") and assumes the critical responsibility of publicly debunking the false information. The tone is logical and fact-based, concentrating on specifying the contents of the draft legislation.
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical, analytical, and confrontational, focusing on the honesty and transparency of government actions. The speaker employs direct accusations of dishonesty and lack of transparency ("it was certainly not precise and, I would say, also not entirely honest"), demanding explanations regarding methodological errors. The appeals are primarily logical and procedural.
2024-10-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and urgent, emphasizing a systemic pattern of the opponent's inaction. Strong and emotional language is used (e.g., calling the minister a threat to internal security, KAPO's "cry for help"), and long lists of the government's alleged failures are presented. The speaker employs direct personal attacks, questioning the minister's intelligence ("I do not believe that you are so stupid").
2024-10-15
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is polite (addressing the chairperson) yet decisive, and includes an apology for a procedural error. Both formal parliamentary language and figurative expressions are used (e.g., "stifling the momentum," "don't sweep this under the rug") to emphasize the necessity of adopting the proposal.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and at times confrontational, accusing ministers of incompetence and failing to provide answers. Rhetorical questions are employed, and the speaker demands that detailed impact analyses (such as the cumulative effect of taxes on families) be read aloud. The speaker appeals both to logic (by referencing bureaucracy and duplication) and to statesmanlike thinking, while simultaneously highlighting legislative precedents and historical context.
2024-10-10
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, critical, and demanding, focusing on logical and procedural arguments. The speaker employs a direct, slightly combative address aimed at the members of the coalition, stressing the theme of institutional dignity ("This is not a dignified attitude toward Parliament").
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly critical and combative, especially concerning the government's actions, which are labeled as "folly" and an "exceedingly foolish solution." It employs strong logical arguments, drawing upon historical compromises and specific financial examples (e.g., the loss of the revenue base for the city of Paide). The tone is formal yet passionate, also incorporating ironic remarks (e.g., regarding Annely's competence on financial matters and the turning off of the light at the podium).
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and penetrating, employing powerful metaphors (e.g., "trembling for one's seat like a loose coin") to cast doubt on the Prime Minister's political resolve. The speaker highlights the Reform Party's inaction and dishonesty, repeatedly raising specific questions regarding practical steps. The tone remains formal, yet the substance is intensely confrontational.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and focuses on logical arguments, relying on legal statutes and the rational use of time. The tone is demanding and clarity-seeking, particularly concerning the session chair's duty to introduce the procedural order during technical problems.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, urgent, and combative, expressing personal fear regarding the government's actions. Irony is employed (e.g., bringing prisoners to Estonia as "Estonia's Nokia") alongside strong emotional appeals, while simultaneously relying on concrete data and references (e.g., the Chancellor of Justice's views, an article written by a Sakala journalist). The Minister's presentation was described as "soporific" and the responses as "evasive."
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical and pressing, posing direct questions to the minister concerning the government’s inaction and the absence of solutions. The tone is formal and analytical, focusing on logical argumentation and policy effectiveness, stressing that the objective is to train soldiers, not "cannon fodder."
2024-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is demanding and repetitive, focusing on extracting specific answers regarding the substance of the responsibility. It employs both logical argumentation (requiring a description of the content of the responsibility) and emotional appeal, emphasizing the injustice of the situation concerning the future of young people. The tone is formal, yet critical and persistent.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is combative, direct, and intense, featuring sharp personal attacks (e.g., questioning the minister's "rapid transformation"). The speaker employs strong language (e.g., "grossly violating") and emphasizes logical arguments concerning security and parliamentary procedures, ultimately demanding a recess due to the violation of procedural rules.
2024-07-29
The 15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu.
The rhetorical style is direct and critical, encompassing both formal legal argumentation (references to specific sections) and a personal, sarcastic note (a comment regarding the advisor to the Speaker of the Riigikogu). The tone is demanding and stresses the necessity of order, employing a logical appeal rooted in the text of the law.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong and condemnatory expressions (e.g., "utter nonsense," "perverse regional policy," "divide-and-rule bill"). Appeals are made both to logic (the absence of an impact analysis) and to emotion, emphasizing the unfair effect of the taxes on rural residents. The speech is formal, delivered on behalf of the parliamentary group, and includes repeated references to the different political choices made by neighboring countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Finland).
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is critical, formal, and demanding, employing ironic allusions regarding the opposing party's avoidance of responsibility. The speaker emphasizes logical argumentation (stressing the need for "the correct diagnosis") and issues urgent procedural calls for the advancement of parliamentary democracy. The tone is predominantly confrontational and accusatory.
2024-07-15
15th Riigikogu, Extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is formal and persuasive, aimed at gathering support for the candidate in the Riigikogu Board elections. Direct, yet moderately critical claims are used regarding the current board, citing their insufficient performance. Appeals are based on the candidate's qualifications and values, such as the defense of democracy and sound political culture.
2024-06-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, additional plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, focusing on procedural requests and utilizing polite address ("Honorable Chairman"). The speaker includes a brief, measured appeal to consider the consequences of the vote, which functions as a logical appeal rather than an emotional plea.
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, concerned, and confrontational, employing strong emotional expressions such as "circus" and "extremely regrettable" to characterize the quality of the legislation. Logical arguments regarding the contradictions between legal certainty and regional policy are combined with an emotional appeal to discontinue the proceedings. The Minister and the commission's representative are personally criticized for their superficiality.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is predominantly confrontational and critical, employing strong, emotionally charged words such as "hypocritical," "deceitful," "outrageous," and "incivility." He/She balances these emotional appeals (ignoring 80,000 signatures, penalizing rural regions) with detailed legal and procedural argumentation.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly confrontational, accusatory, and repetitive, focusing repeatedly on the government's alleged "lying" and "deception" both before and after the elections. Strong emotional language ("brutal cuts") and rhetorical questions are employed to underscore the loss of political trust. The tone is urgent and critical, intended to discredit the government's capacity to make difficult decisions.
2024-06-04
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting
The style is combative, critical, and forceful, utilizing strong emotional appeals, labeling the government "the government of lies" and their actions "brutal cuts." The speaker stresses the loss of trust and duplicity, backing their arguments with specific references to the coalition agreement and the context of the economic crisis. The tone is cautionary and defensive of authority, urging colleagues not to undermine the authority of the state and the parliament.
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong emotional and ethical language (e.g., "ugly and vile," "it is very difficult to remain balanced here"). The speaker balances this emotional intensity with legal arguments (constitutional legal certainty) and a forecast of the financial impact (in the hundreds of millions).
2024-05-28
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The style is sharp, accusatory, and penetrating, highlighting the government's deceitfulness and its rigid adherence to dogma. It repeatedly employs the term "statesmanship" as a moral appeal, urging the coalition toward greater responsibility. It combines logical arguments (specific monetary figures) with emotional accusations (lying, farce, a foolish draft bill). Procedural issues are also raised, challenging the competence of colleagues and the interpretation of the rules of procedure.
2024-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker’s style is critical and direct, employing both emotional appeals (references to historical pain and the threat of societal moral decay) and logical arguments (procedural errors, the growth of bureaucracy). The tone towards the coalition is sharp, accusing them of ignoring more substantive contributions and speaking to deaf ears. He/She emphasizes that the final vote represents a "black and white choice."
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker's style is sharp, critical, and insistent, underscoring the gravity of the situation and the deplorability of the government's inaction. He/She employs strong contrasts (e.g., the swift adoption of the tax package versus the dragging out of security matters) and levels accusations against the government (e.g., "cunning or impudence," having "manipulated" the assessments provided by security agencies). The focus rests equally on logical argumentation (referencing experts and KAPO) and emotional appeal, directly linking the subject matter to the threat of war.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The speaker's style is predominantly combative and forceful, particularly when discussing procedural issues, utilizing strong expressions such as "completely wrong and misleading," "horribly misleading," and "violently and unlawfully." Appeals are made both to logic (by referencing laws and Supreme Court decisions) and to emotion and morality (by referencing painful historical moments associated with denunciation). The tone is formal yet critical, demanding comprehensive explanations and the termination of the proceedings.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The style is sharp, accusatory, and insistent, highlighting the government's inaction and failure to deliver on its promises. Rhetorical questions and accusations are employed to pressure the opposition, for instance, by referencing the "tax war" and the "abstract shifting of responsibility elsewhere." The appeal itself is mainly logical and fact-based, relying heavily on legal expertise.
2024-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The discourse is predominantly formal, analytical, and critical, relying heavily on logical arguments and facts (expert assessments). The tone is serious and concerned regarding issues of electoral confidence and procedural violations. When communicating with the adversary, the tone is sharp and demanding, calling upon colleagues to speak on subjects they are proficient in.
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, critical, and accusatory, employing strong emotional expressions such as "tax war," "hypocrisy," and "yet another lie." He combines these accusations with detailed logical arguments that focus on the lack of data, the narrow scope of the draft bill, and legislative errors. The politician also utilizes historical references to criticize the ideological consistency of the Social Democrats and former colleagues (Tsahkna).
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical, forceful, and legally precise, focusing on the presentation of both procedural and substantive arguments. Strong language is employed (e.g., "forcibly linked," "unlawful activity"), with references made to statutes and Supreme Court case law. The speaker also employs irony, contrasting the opponents' digital enthusiasm with a slogan from the Perestroika era, to underscore the paramount importance of election reliability.
2024-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and incisive, emphasizing the gravity of the demographic situation ("in a greater demographic crisis than ever before"). Both emotional accusations (irresponsible, a disservice) and logical arguments concerning sustainability and legal certainty are employed. The speaker uses repetition and direct address to the minister to underscore the comprehensively negative signature of the government's policy.
2024-04-03
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and urgent, emphasizing the waste of time and the neglect of security in a situation where "war is underway." Rhetorical questions are repeatedly employed ("Why are you playing?") and the government's inaction on security matters is contrasted with the forcefulness used to impose taxes.
2024-04-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and frustrated, describing the procedural dispute as a "hopeless undertaking" and an "ugly business." It employs strong accusations of the coalition's unilateralism ("imposed by force") and relies primarily on logical and constitutional arguments, rather than emotional appeals.
2024-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, formal, and interrogative, focusing on logical and procedural arguments. The speaker expresses concern about engaging in potential "game-playing," which suggests doubt regarding the government's sincerity or its capacity to honor agreements. The tone is rather cautionary and demanding, emphasizing the parliament's responsibility.
2024-03-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal, critical, and analytical, employing a rhetorical question to assert the speaker's position before the Auditor General. The speaker utilizes a piece of folk wisdom ("the tighter the sieve, the more holes") to illustrate the negative ramifications of the legal amendment. The tone is logical and focuses on highlighting practical issues.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is sharply accusatory and combative, emphasizing the government's dishonesty and breach of promises ("they lied"). The speaker employs strong moral appeals and demands honesty, criticizing the coalition negotiations as cynical "quid pro quo" trading ("sausage for a sausage") on a security issue.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style of address is formal and inquisitive, respectfully addressing the presenter ("Honored Presenter"). The speaker employs logical argumentation to test the scope and consistency of the proposal presented, maintaining an analytical and non-confrontational tone.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetoric is insistent, critical, and highly aggressive, stressing the security threat and leveling accusations against the opposition for inaction and "idiotic solutions." Strong emotional language is deployed (e.g., "completely absurd," "horse-trading," "political gamesmanship"), and the necessity of resolving the situation quickly is underscored, given that "the war is ongoing."
2024-02-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative and critical, employing strong emotional language, such as "tax war" and "terribly unfair." The speaker balances these emotional appeals (highlighting the injustice faced by families with children and rural residents) with logical arguments (retroactive taxation and the absence of an impact analysis). The minister is portrayed as a routine responder—a "tankist"—who fails to provide adequate answers, and the necessity of resolving procedural issues (sound quality) is underscored.
2024-02-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, repeatedly expressing confusion regarding the government's policy ("I do not understand"). Logical argumentation is employed, citing contradictory statements made by ministers and the text of the draft legislation to highlight the government's inconsistent position. The tone is formal, yet it also contains an emotional appeal (the hope that the government is not engaging in deception).
2024-02-07
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is critical and direct, using strong language, such as "stupidity," to characterize the government's tax policy. The speaker uses both procedural logic (the structure of the Q&A session) and economic arguments (competitiveness and livelihood) to substantiate their views. The tone is formal, but it contains a sharp political attack.
2024-02-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is serious, forceful, and critical, emphasizing the anxiety caused in society by the government's contradictory messages. The appeals are primarily logical and fact-based, utilizing references to KAPO, studies, and historical examples (30 years for the transition to Estonian-language education). The speaker stresses the importance of open discussion in the Riigikogu hall, prioritizing it over written questions.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and demanding, expressing dissatisfaction and a lack of conviction regarding the ministers' responses. Strong expressions are used (e.g., "chaos," "brutal cuts," "you are acting weird and dragging your feet") to describe the government's inaction. The appeals are primarily logical, relying on contradictory statements made by government members and specific financial figures to expose inconsistencies.