By Plenary Sessions: Priit Sibul
Total Sessions: 99
Fully Profiled: 99
2025-10-16
XV Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is highly polite and respectful, including expressions of gratitude directed at both the chair and the presenter. A structured, two-part question is posed, which highlights a logical and policy-centered approach.
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
The tone is demanding and urgent, particularly regarding finding solutions to border issues, expressing hope for a swift resolution "tomorrow." The strongly critical and emotionally charged term "neonationalization" is employed to highlight the state's unjust treatment of landowners. The speaker raises questions about specific details and deadlines, blending criticism with fact-based inquiry.
2025-10-14
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is interrogative, critical, and persistent, aimed directly at challenging the minister's attitudes. Repeated rhetorical questions are employed to underscore the importance of the service provider's transparency and linguistic proficiency. The tone is formal, focusing on logical arguments derived from the definition of public service.
2025-10-13
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, posing pointed and detailed questions to the Minister. The argument is strictly logical and procedural, casting doubt on the government's technical budgetary decisions and their long-term viability. The speaker employs a rhetorical device by referencing the government's own prior criticism concerning the failures of preceding administrations.
2025-10-07
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, focusing on logical arguments and the comparison of data. The speaker presents their questions in a structured manner, often in two parts, and demands explanations from the government regarding factual contradictions and inconsistencies found within the budget documents.
2025-10-06
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and interrogative, employing a critical tone to highlight procedural inefficiency. The appeal is logical, contrasting the waiter's alleged rapid movement with the actual slow pace, which contradicts the early warning.
2025-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is interrogative, demanding, and persistent, particularly concerning the details of the presenter’s answers. Formal language is employed, but sharp criticism is leveled at the government’s policy regarding its lack of clarity and its role in exacerbating inflation. The appeals are primarily logical and focus on the consequences of the policy.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is polite, formal, and interrogative, addressing the presenters with respect. The focus is placed on verifying facts and logical arguments, particularly when questioning the accuracy of information provided by officials. Emotional appeals are absent; the emphasis is strictly on gathering information.
2025-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The style is formal and analytical, focusing on the logical framing of the problem and posing questions to a high-ranking official. The metaphor of a "fork" is used to describe the economic dilemma, which indicates a desire for a pragmatic solution. The tone is concerned and inquisitive, stressing the necessity of better managing price increases.
2025-09-16
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is formal, directed toward the Deputy Speaker of the Riigikogu and the Chancellor of Justice, yet simultaneously critical and apprehensive. The emotionally charged term "neonationalization" is employed to characterize the situation. The appeal itself is predominantly logical, grounded in specific instances and questions regarding the Environmental Board's notification obligation.
2025-09-11
15th Riigikogu, 6th plenary sitting
The tone is formal, respectful, and inquisitive, beginning with a strong recognition of the work done by the rapporteur and the Financial Supervisory Authority. The speaker poses their questions constructively and logically, focusing on finding solutions and identifying political bottlenecks.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, directly interrogative, and investigative, employing repeated questioning to highlight inconsistencies and demand accountability. The tone is skeptical, particularly regarding the minister's claims of legal binding or a "hostage situation." The speaker relies on facts and details, referencing specific dates and documents.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is formal, critical, and conveys surprise at the minister's change of stance. The emphasis is on logical argumentation, contrasting the minister's previous principles (salary in cash) with his currently accepting attitude. The speaker frequently employs questions to call into question the soundness and consistency of the minister's decisions.
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharp and aggressive, opening with a critique of the minister's speech for its lack of substance ("more pathos than content"). The speaker employs logical arguments, posing three specific and detailed questions based on information sourced from the media (Äripäev) and previous committee discussions. The tone is demanding, seeking concrete answers rather than a general overview.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is consistent, analytical, and rigorous, especially when submitting interpellations and challenging procedural decisions. Formal language is used, relying on logical arguments and referencing laws, the positions of the Chancellor of Justice, and specific dates. The tone is often critical and skeptical, particularly concerning the government's explanations.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, sarcastic, and confrontational, particularly when discussing tax policy issues. It employs political nicknames (such as "the face of the Škoda ad") and accusations ("blackmail"). The speaker favors rhetorical questions and emotionally charged political language to cast doubt on opponents' motives.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is skeptical, questioning, and demanding, repeatedly expressing incomprehension regarding the minister's explanations ("I do not understand this"). Direct questions and logical counterarguments are employed to highlight the policy's gaps and contradictions. The tone is formal, but includes a sharp political barb, suggesting a partisan motive.
2025-06-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is confrontational and skeptical, employing ironic metaphors such as the "green corridor" for dangerous Swedish criminals. The speaker relies heavily on emotional appeal, listing severe offenses (murderers, pedophiles), and presents direct questions to the minister that challenge the core tenets of the government's policy. The tone remains formal ("Esteemed Minister"), yet the content is clearly aggressive.
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The discourse style is formal, analytical, and cautious, focusing on logical arguments regarding legislative competence, proportionality, and clarity. A critical and occasionally questioning tone is employed to emphasize the insufficient predictability of the drafts and the absence of solutions. Emotional appeals are utilized when describing the personal nature of death and faith, stressing that it is impossible to compel the heart through legislation.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, detailed, and constructive, focusing on the quality of legislation and legal correctness. The speaker employs logical arguments, emphasizing the need to preempt problems that arise for individuals who have acquired property. The tone is formal and procedural, including expressions of gratitude and voting requests.
2025-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, addressing the minister directly ("Dear Minister!"). The rhetoric is logical and data-driven, focusing on the lack of specific financial information, and posing direct and demanding questions regarding the total cost of the reform.
2025-06-02
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, focusing on logical and procedural details. The speaker employs polite phrases ("Honorable Chairman of the Riigikogu! Dear Minister!"), yet simultaneously poses skeptical questions regarding the government's budget justifications. He directly requests the Minister's assistance in comprehending the budget amendments, stressing the necessity of clarification.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is dual: initially, questions are presented formally and data-driven, but when criticizing the bill, it becomes extremely aggressive and informal. Strong and derogatory language ("in the shitter") is used to completely discredit both the previous and the proposed bill, emphasizing emotional and contemptuous opposition.
2025-05-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, information briefing.
The rhetorical style is direct, interrogative, and critical, employing strong and emotionally charged terms such as "neonationalization." The speaker relies on both a specific case study (a forest owner, valued at 125,000 euros) and detailed data (compensation rates) to construct a logical appeal for justice.
2025-05-15
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the minister respectfully while presenting criticism regarding the shortcomings of the education system. The speaker employs logical argumentation, describing the confusion and lack of motivation caused by the policy (the change in exam timing). The tone is inquisitive and demands justification for the policy's objectives.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The speaker’s style is combative, critical, and insistent, utilizing powerful emotional and historical appeals. He accuses the minister of indifference and ironically refers to him as a "savior." The argumentation is bolstered by detailed case studies (such as the value of a forest owner's land dropping by half) and a direct comparison to nationalization.
2025-05-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting.
The style is analytical and sharp, frequently employing rhetorical questions to challenge the government’s actions and responses (e.g., "Why wasn't this sensible solution found?"). The speaker utilizes an emotional appeal, highlighting the case of a specific concerned citizen (Põlva sports veteran Ilmar Tagel), combining this with detailed political and procedural criticism. The tone is formal, but the speaker is not afraid to point toward political self-promotion and the suspicion surrounding "roof money" (pork-barrel spending/earmarks).
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The manner of speaking is extremely formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing on short and clear instructions. The style is entirely logical and purposeful, avoiding any emotional or narrative appeals. The speaker uses the repetitive and concise phrase "Palun hääletada" (Please vote) to ensure the smooth conduct of the session.
2025-05-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The tone is formal, questioning, and procedural, maintaining politeness when addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the minister. The speaker employs a logical appeal, citing authorities (the Chancellor of Justice, legal experts) to underscore the potential gravity of the draft bill's deficiencies.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is detailed, questioning, and demanding, focusing heavily on facts, deadlines, and contradictions (such as the true objective of the funding). It employs critical and sarcastic language directed at former politicians ("Defense Minister Pevkur ordering drones from China with 'hocus pocus'"). The overall tone is formal, yet deeply concerned about both the delays in completing the border and the government's lack of knowledge regarding current surveillance systems.
2025-04-22
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and inquisitive, addressing the minister politely ("Dear Minister!"). The focus is on logical and procedural analysis, emphasizing the need to gain an overview of the factual situation and to offer solutions for the future legislative framework.
2025-04-16
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and at times regretful, particularly concerning earlier support for the 100% target. Strong negative descriptors are employed, such as "utopian projects" and "the one and only truth," to highlight the ideological slant of the policy. The appeal is primarily logical and consequence-focused, warning of the danger of economic damage and the creative interpretation of laws.
2025-04-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is interrogative and analytical, presenting its arguments through a series of rhetorical questions aimed at the Chancellor of Justice. Specific, real-life examples are employed (acquaintances in Southeast Estonia, a jeep versus an electric car) to illustrate the unreasonableness of the policy, relying on logical juxtaposition rather than emotional appeals.
2025-03-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style of discourse is formal, analytical, and cautious, employing both detailed questions regarding implementation and broad historical argumentation. The tone is critical of the government's approach, highlighting logical and legal constraints, even though the subject matter itself is considered more a question of the heart than of the mind.
2025-03-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The style is formal, analytical, and skeptical, focusing on highlighting the lack of clarity in the government's plans and criticizing the phrasing of the coalition agreement as "clumsy." Logical appeals are employed, citing political documents directly and repeatedly demanding concrete figures and explanations (e.g., "How many workers are we talking about?", "What exactly does this exception entail?").
2025-03-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and inquiry-oriented, addressing both the chair and the presenter respectfully. The speaker utilizes a logical appeal (logos), drawing on external information (national public broadcasting, intelligence data) to substantiate their questions.
2025-03-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, addressing the Prime Minister directly ("Dear Prime Minister"). The rhetoric is logical and centers on demanding accountability, posing specific questions regarding policy implementation and the progress of investments. Cautious support is expressed initially, followed by a sharp series of questions.
2025-03-10
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly critical and forceful, emphasizing the urgency of national defense issues and expressing concern over the lack of unified decision-making. Both logical arguments (budgetary impact, delivery timelines) and strong accusations leveled at the government (misleading the public) are employed. The speaker attempts to elevate the issue to the level of public discourse, drawing a comparison to the previous debate on energy policy.
2025-02-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and directly interrogative, focusing on demanding facts and figures from the minister. The speaker employs logical appeals, referencing previous interviews (Jürgen Ligi) and the opinions of academics (Aaviksoo) to underscore the lack of adequate data. The tone is demanding and critical of the government’s unclear procedures.
2025-02-26
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, press briefing
The rhetorical style is sharply accusatory and confrontational, particularly directed at the Prime Minister. Strong phrases like "lied" and "number magic" are employed, indicating significant emotional intensity. Although logical justifications and calculations are demanded, the manner of presentation is rather aggressive and clearly expresses distrust.
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetoric is highly interrogative and critical, repeatedly demanding clarification of the discussions and analyses underpinning the draft legislation. The speaker employs irony, referencing earlier claims made by fellow faction members regarding the danger posed by churches and ballot boxes, in order to underscore their opposition. The overall tone is skeptical and demanding, focusing on the absence of rational justification.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The tone is sharp, directly interrogative, and critical, employing an emotional appeal regarding the perceived lack of "common sense" in the government's decisions. It concludes by raising a direct crisis of confidence concerning the Prime Minister's legitimacy should Parliament withdraw its trust. The style is formal, yet it incorporates powerful rhetorical challenges.
2025-02-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, centering on the presentation of specific, substantive questions that demand evidence-based responses. The tone is anxious and demanding concerning the security situation, stressing the need for actions over mere words, and seeking confirmation regarding the intensity of regional cooperation.
2025-01-28
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal and interrogative, focusing on clarifying political positions and the details of the draft bill. The tone is concerned about the future of the Estonian language and firm in its opposition to increasing the quota. The speaker employs a logical approach, seeking factual clarity regarding the content and validity of the language requirements.
2025-01-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is passionate, critical, and pressing, highlighting the conflict between the decisions made and the actual level of threat. Both logical arguments (budget criteria, the expiration of the security tax) and emotional appeals are employed, urging the coalition to take heed and follow through on decisions with actions, not just rhetoric.
2025-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is probing, aggressive, and demanding, using direct questions to pinpoint responsibility ("Whose decision was this, exactly?"). The speaker intersperses detailed, fact-based arguments (dates, protocols) with sarcastic remarks, comparing the situation to a Kreisiraadio sketch and referring to 1.5 million euros as something that is not "just 3.50 tucked into a hoodie pocket." The overall tone is critical and expresses outrage.
2024-12-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and questioning, at times expressing frustration over failed procedural decisions ("I just don't get it"). The speaker uses logical arguments, emphasizing the need for predictability and planning, and illustrates their viewpoints with the metaphor of the "stepped ladder."
2024-12-10
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is interrogative and analytical, focusing on posing problems and seeking solutions. The speaker employs numerous rhetorical questions to highlight the complexity of measuring parliamentary work and the lack of accountability for regional decisions. The tone is formal, but it includes sharp criticism directed at the inaction of certain political forces.
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, detailed, and question-oriented, aiming to gain confirmation regarding the discussions held within the commission and the viewpoints of ministry officials. It employs an analytical and persistent tone, focusing on facts and procedural details ("Did I understand correctly?").
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is incisive, interrogative, and demanding, focusing on challenging the presenter's arguments and legal foundation. The speaker repeatedly demands specific answers and citations of legal statutes, indicating an appeal based on logic and procedure. The tone is skeptical and seeks to expose the opposing party's motives ("thought control").
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The speaker’s style is highly critical and combative, employing powerful emotional imagery and metaphors, such as comparing the government to an "alcoholic son" who is taking the mother’s last. He emphasizes the urgency of the situation, referencing the demographic crisis and a historical threat (the delay of 1939). He blends logical arguments (budgetary data, inflation) with sharp accusations regarding the government’s duplicity ("the form is the content").
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is analytical and, at times, passionate, particularly concerning social issues where a strong moral framework is utilized. The speaker criticizes opponents for focusing on trivialities (literally, "holes in the fence") and employs rhetorical questions to underscore the debate's lack of substance and the potential inadequacy of the opposing side. The speaker maintains a formal but emotional tone, referencing a personal experience from 16 years prior.
2024-11-05
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, posing direct questions to the Prime Minister and the rapporteur. The emphasis is placed on logical argumentation and challenging the soundness of political decisions, particularly within the context of bureaucracy and competitiveness. The tone is rather concerned and demands clarification regarding proactive initiatives, as opposed to those that create obstacles.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The tone is confrontational, demanding, and at times ironic, criticizing the "collective brain" that prepared the minister's speech and the minister's "performance." The speaker uses direct questions and expresses frustration regarding the incomprehensibility of the debate's content ("a bit strange and incomprehensible"). The style is rather logical and fact-based, demanding specific budget lines and procedural clarity, but also includes sharp personal recommendations (Do not teach the Minister).
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and persistent, focusing on clarifying details and verifying facts. The initial criticism is quickly replaced by a conciliatory tone, apologizing for having misunderstood the minister. It uses logical appeals to ascertain specific amounts and budget lines necessary for legislative work.
2024-10-15
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and inquisitive, addressing the Minister respectfully. The focus is placed on logical arguments and the analysis of policy consequences, drawing on examples from past failures and the actions taken by neighboring countries. Emotional appeals are avoided; the emphasis is strictly on fiscal and economic considerations.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical, questioning, and demanding, focusing on logical arguments and political consistency. Sharp language is employed, accusing the opposing side of speaking "empty words" regarding previous promises (specifically concerning areas for cutbacks). The speaker presents their positions in a formal, yet straightforward and challenging tone.
2024-10-08
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the presiding officer and the minister with respect. The tone is direct and persistent, focusing on logical explanation and the clarification of details ("I didn't quite grasp that," "Could we perhaps review that specific point once more?").
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, press briefing
The style is formal (as it addresses the Prime Minister) but sharply critical and accusatory, particularly directed at the Minister of Defence. The speaker employs indirect rhetoric, quoting Oidsalu’s comment at length to raise serious ethical doubts, and then asks the Prime Minister to confirm them. The speaker also uses personal allusions, recalling the Prime Minister’s previous confrontations with Pevkur.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and procedure-focused, highlighting the contradiction between the government's actions and its rhetoric (specifically, reducing bureaucracy). The speaker employs logical arguments and cites specific costs and figures to substantiate their claims regarding the increase in administrative burden. The tone is formal and detail-oriented, expressing disappointment regarding the quality of engagement.
2024-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, with the speaker addressing the session chair and the Chancellor of Justice directly. The speaker employs a historical narrative (the story of the construction of Tartu Prison) to introduce the current political issue, concentrating on a logical analysis of the legal problems involved.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and demanding, emphasizing the respondent's duty to stick to the point and avoid irrelevant chatter. Light sarcasm is employed regarding the name of the new tax ("a beautiful name for the little darling"), and appeals are made to logic and details.
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and demanding, posing a question to the minister. Moderate sarcasm is employed, referring to the minister's statement as cliché and the new tax as a "little darling." The appeal is logical, demanding specific financial data and clarification regarding government agreements.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, yet simultaneously sharply accusatory and interrogative. The speaker employs direct questions to challenge the target's ideological consistency and integrity, repeatedly asking: "What exactly happened in the interim?" The tone is critical, centered on the logical demand for an explanation regarding the discrepancies between past and current stances.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive and critical, employing strong emotional language ("catastrophic consequences," "mystical idea"). Historical citations and juxtaposition are utilized to underscore the government's ideological divergence and the erosion of trust. The appeals tend to be ideological and value-driven, rather than data-driven.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The style is formal and direct, addressing the candidate respectfully, yet the content is skeptical and critical, particularly concerning the political continuity of the coalition. The speaker employs logical appeals, posing detailed questions regarding taxes and defense spending, but also opens with cautious goodwill toward the candidate, while simultaneously noting the complexity of the times ahead.
2024-07-15
15th Riigikogu, Extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is critical and interrogative, focusing on both procedural and substantive shortcomings. Rhetorical questions are employed to underscore the arbitrariness and unreasonableness of the parliamentary majority's decisions. The tone is formal and logical, stressing legal correctness.
2024-06-13
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session
The rhetorical style is polite and formal, employing salutations such as "Esteemed Chair" and "Dear Presenter." The tone is inquisitive and businesslike, focusing on the logical need for information to identify new problems.
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The style is critical, detailed, and highly argumentative, focusing on logical and procedural appeals. Strong and emotional language is employed to describe the negative consequences (e.g., "cosmic," "killing off rural life," "councils being held hostage"). Sharp rhetorical questions are posed to cast doubt on the coalition's motives and decision-making processes.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and emotional, employing strong judgments such as "colossal mess" and "completely absurd." The speaker combines procedural criticism (regarding the committee chairman's leadership skills) with ideological appeals, addressing the coalition directly ("Dear friends, squirrels!"). Historical quotes are used to emphasize the coalition's fundamental deviation from its principles.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, employing strong negative phrasing (e.g., "tax cascade," "truly insane" land tax, "dawdling"). A logical appeal is utilized, referencing previous warnings and comparisons to neighboring countries. The speaker poses pointed questions to the ministers, demanding explanations regarding the government's inaction or mistakes.
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical and incisive, posing direct and challenging questions to the minister and the rapporteur. Logical argumentation is employed to expose contradictions within government policy, specifically concerning the method of making compromises, which is described as being "far removed from the Estonian people." The tone is formal, yet it incorporates critical rhetoric ("to squander millions at the government level").
2024-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is concerned and serious, employing historical analogy (occupation vs. freedom) and narrative (Taagepera’s story) to underscore the depth of the social issue. Regarding the labor market, irony and sarcasm are used to criticize the rebranding of simple jobs as "innovation" (for instance, calling taxi drivers "information society service providers").
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, accusatory, and confrontational, employing strong emotional appeals and moral condemnation. The speaker accuses the minister of detachment and politics of cynicism. Direct rhetorical questions are used to call the opponent's position into question.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is polite and formal, respectfully addressing both the chairman and the presenter. The proposal is presented as a question, seeking the presenter's opinion, which suggests a logical and consensual appeal rather than an emotional one.
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly critical and demanding, especially toward government representatives and presenters, insisting on concrete answers and avoiding vague references (e.g., to EU regulations). It employs logical and historical arguments to challenge opponents' positions, highlighting political contradictions and previous decisions. Irony is used, for example, by referencing the length of the draft bill compared to the list of cited literature.
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is analytical and incisive, focusing on logical arguments and the raising of procedural questions directed at the minister. The tone is formal and critical, expressing skepticism regarding the government's justifications, particularly concerning the coverage of procedural costs and the speed of the legislative process. Direct rhetorical questions are employed to substantiate the choices made.
2024-04-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal and direct, addressing esteemed officials (the Chairman of the Riigikogu, the President). A logical, question-based approach is employed, demanding specific answers concerning the conduct and voting record of the Governor of the Bank of Estonia within the ECB Governing Council.
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, yet personal and conciliatory, emphasizing previous successful cooperation with the minister on substantive issues. It utilizes both formal address and slightly colloquial expressions (e.g., "it's in with milk") to describe the project's solid status.
2024-04-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal and respectful, while simultaneously incorporating personal touches (an apology for not paying attention to the rector's presentation) and light humor regarding rural life. The tone is one of concern, highlighting systemic issues, particularly within the context of national defense and food security. The speaker employs logical arguments to stress the significance of broader value perceptions and attitudes, beyond mere political details.
2024-04-10
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker employs an inquisitive, critical, and detail-oriented rhetorical style, repeatedly directing pointed questions at the presenters and ministers. The tone remains formal and logical, relying heavily on legal analysis and procedural considerations. The speaker uses cautionary examples (such as oligarchs released from sanctions) to emphasize the risks inherent in passivity.
2024-04-01
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the "ruler" directly. The tone is conceptual and concerned, focusing on the logical framing of the question regarding the necessity of societal ideals.
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, employing direct and structured questions to clarify the content of the draft bill. The tone is firm, especially regarding ambiguous terminology ("nearby area of land"), demanding that its substance be defined. The speaker emphasizes logical consistency and briefly connects the technical issues with the social context (the welfare of children on balconies).
2024-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, politely addressing the presiding officer and the minister. The address is structured as analytical questions aimed at exploring specific political problems and potential solutions. Emotional appeals are absent; the focus is solely on a logical and relevant request for information.
2024-03-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is analytical, critical, and expresses concern, focusing on procedural and legal matters. Figurative metaphors are employed ("the back door," "carving a new entrance into a stone wall") to highlight the absurdity of the process. The tone is formal and logic-driven, seeking answers from the State Comptroller and emphasizing the necessity of parliamentary oversight.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is analytical, yet sharply critical and skeptical, employing ironic and vernacular metaphors (e.g., "Potemkin village," "searching for spunk," "By the Pike's command, according to my wish: oven, drive!"). Although the speaker acknowledges the value of substantive parliamentary debate, the tone regarding the ministry's actions is dismissive, emphasizing logical argumentation and the lack of resources. The speech is formal, but includes a personal anecdote (a former desk mate) to add emotional appeal.
2024-02-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The style of address is formal and polite, respectfully addressing both the chair of the session and the presenter. The tone is direct and businesslike; the question is described as a "simple question," which suggests a desire to receive a quick and clear answer.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and sharply interrogative, repeatedly employing rhetorical questions to highlight the draft's unreasonableness and lack of clarity ("Why are we doing this?", "Why was it necessary to use the back door?"). The appeal is directed toward logic and procedural correctness, focusing on the system's complexity and duplication rather than emotional arguments.
2024-02-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative. The speaker typically presents their viewpoints as questions, requesting the presenter to assess the situation, provide a forecast, or prioritize the problems. The tone is logical, focusing on fact-based evaluation and the search for solutions.
2024-02-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal and analytical, employing logical arguments that emphasize the undesirable consequences of the policy (e.g., the tax compels families to purchase two older cars instead of one new one). The tone regarding large families is critical and concerned, utilizing strong language such as "we are repressing them," while on energy issues, the tone is rather information-seeking and demands clarification.
2024-02-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is inquisitive and skeptical, utilizing hypothetical scenarios and rhetorical questions to challenge the underlying assumptions of the draft. Although the address is formal (directed at the Chairman and the rapporteur), it also includes some colloquial and emotional expressions (e.g., "will start gobbling up even more," "it still seems odd to most people").
2024-01-25
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is urgent and demanding, employing strong warnings ("catastrophe") and posing specific procedural questions (when, which ministry, what it covers). The tone is formal and focuses on applying logical pressure to obtain clear answers regarding the legislative timetable.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and analytical, using in the introduction a polite, but possibly ironic acknowledgment of the minister's preparation. The speech is structured around logical, concrete questions, citing examples of the inefficient implementation of legal norms (e.g., 75-year restrictions). The appeal is purely logical and policy-based.
2024-01-23
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The tone is formal and questioning, respectfully directed at both the Vice-Chairman of the Riigikogu and the governing administration. The address itself is analytical, focusing on political specifics and financing matters, and demands concrete data and an action plan from the government.
2024-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is professional, analytical, and critical, highlighting procedural and legal failures, as well as instances of abuse. Logical arguments are employed, supported by concrete examples (the MTA letter, the National Library proposal, and vaccine procurement). The tone is formal but conveys concern and calls for swift action to ensure transparency.
2024-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing both the chairman and the governing authority. The speech is brief and direct, focusing on a logical, procedural framing of the issue, while strictly avoiding emotional appeals.
2024-01-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and respectful, addressing the Deputy Speaker of the Riigikogu and the rapporteur. The speaker balances an emotional appeal (stressing that humiliation is too much) with a logical and investigative approach, posing precise questions about the legal root cause of the problem. The tone is analytical and solution-oriented.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and argumentative, employing rhetorical questions to challenge the government's credibility ("how seriously can we even take this national budget strategy?"). Specific quotes and dates are utilized to underscore the lack of logical consistency, simultaneously injecting emotional color (e.g., "the boys start fooling around"). The tone remains formal, yet it incorporates pointed personal references aimed at the ruler.
2024-01-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal and courteous, incorporating greetings ("A successful New Year") and expressions of gratitude. An analytical approach is employed, with the objective of achieving clarity regarding the content of the draft law, even utilizing the interpretation of body language to justify the question being posed.