By Plenary Sessions: Aivar Sõerd
Total Sessions: 30
Fully Profiled: 30
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is critical and analytical, focusing on questioning the effectiveness of policies and the validity of established priorities. The speaker employs logical arguments, contrasting the "questionable value" of green initiatives with urgent security and competitiveness issues. The tone is formal and takes the form of a direct question, addressing the presenter with respect.
2025-10-13
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal and procedural, as this is a report by the Steering Committee, providing an overview of the committee’s discussions and decisions. The appeal is primarily logical and economically justified, focusing on competitiveness and the movement of capital. In the second brief address, the tone becomes urgent, emphasizing the rapid adoption of the draft bill.
2025-10-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and data-driven, suitable for the plenary session of the Riigikogu. The tone is concerned, highlighting a negative trend ("Unfortunately, this has, of course, been the case..."), but posing the question in a neutral and fact-based manner.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and question-focused, employing logical argumentation and technical terminology. The tone is critical and demands clarification regarding both the discrepancies in the budget procedures and the stringent provisions of the draft legislation.
2025-10-06
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal, procedural, and analytical, suitable for the role of the leading committee's rapporteur before the Riigikogu plenary session. The speaker focuses on presenting facts and conveying the substance of the committee's decisions and deliberations, maintaining a logical and neutral tone. Emotional appeals are not employed; the emphasis is placed on legislative accuracy and procedural transparency.
2025-09-24
Fifteenth Riigikogu, sixth sitting, plenary sitting.
The style is extremely formal, neutral, and procedural, characteristic of a committee rapporteur who presents a fact-based overview. The presentation is structured around logical arguments and detailed summaries of committee sessions, proposed amendments, and consensus decisions. Emotional appeals are absent; the focus is on clarifying technical details and procedures.
2025-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, logical, and data-based, focusing on specific financial indicators and global trends. The tone is directly interrogative and critical, calling into question the investment decisions of the Bank of Estonia with the question: "Why do you scorn gold in your investment assets?"
2025-06-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, focusing on logical and procedural matters during the plenary session. The speaker poses direct questions to the government regarding budget discrepancies, employing a neutral yet critical tone. The appeal relies on facts and the technical details of the budget.
2025-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is formal, direct, and heavily data-driven, focusing on logical arguments and facts. The tone is demanding and challenging, posing direct questions to the Chairman of the Economic Committee regarding specific metrics. Instead of emotional appeal, statistics and strategic goals are utilized.
2025-05-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, procedural, and informative. The LCR focuses on presenting facts and summarizing the commission's decisions (consensus decisions) and discussions, employing a logical and structured approach. Emotional appeals are absent; the emphasis is placed on clarifying the substance of the law and the procedure.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, particularly toward the initiators of the draft legislation. The speaker repeatedly employs the term "false claim" to underscore the inadequacy of the opposing side's legislative foundations. They emphasize their role as a representative of the commission, tasked with conveying the discussion and decisions, while maintaining a low emotional tone and focusing strictly on logical arguments.
2025-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and consistent, addressing the director and the minister directly. The speaker poses a repeated question in order to obtain clear data and challenges the minister's previous answers (Euro funds, inflation) as "somewhat specious." The emphasis is on logical argumentation and the clarification of data.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is extremely formal, neutral, and matter-of-fact, typical of a report presented by a steering committee. The discourse is logical and fact-based, focusing on explaining the procedure, citing dates, and quoting legal provisions. Emotional appeals are entirely absent; the objective is to convey information and ensure the transparency of the proceedings.
2025-04-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is direct, formal, and challenging, posing questions that demand an immediate and detailed response. A logical appeal is utilized, based on recalling historical facts and demanding accountability (specifically, while serving in the government, holding the Finance Minister portfolio). The tone is confrontational and aimed at exposing the inconsistencies of the opponents.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, especially concerning the opposition's draft bill, which is deemed superficial and flawed ("excessive defectiveness"). The speaker relies heavily on logical arguments, citing economic forecasts, legal issues (unconstitutionality), and factual errors in the draft bill's explanatory memorandum.
2025-02-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and corrective, with objections being refuted directly and substantiated by data ("I completely refute this claim"). The emphasis is on logical argumentation, utilizing detailed tax data and references to commission discussions to demonstrate the draft bill's lack of thoroughness. Rhetorical questions are employed to expose the technical deficiencies of the opposing party's proposal, particularly concerning the taxation of undistributed profits.
2025-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is interrogative, critical, and skeptical, repeatedly calling into question the soundness of the presenter's proposal. The speech is formal, logical, and focuses on technical details and procedural deficiencies, steering clear of emotional appeals.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and procedural, focusing on facts and the course of proceedings (e.g., the dates of committee meetings). The speaker employs logical arguments concerning the necessity of transparency and legislative oversight, while avoiding emotional appeals. The tone is businesslike and measured, but includes criticism regarding the shortcomings of the current system.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The style is analytical, critical, and logic-based, relying on concrete examples and facts regarding the system's inadequacy. The tone is serious and emphasizes the practical failure of the system, while maintaining polite language. He/She presents his/her views argumentatively, also employing rhetorical questions ("Why couldn't it be so?").
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
Overall, the style is highly formal, procedural, and detailed, particularly when introducing draft legislation, where logical and technical arguments dominate. However, when criticism is directed at the performance-based budget, the tone shifts to become sharp and direct, employing judgments such as "a total failure" and raising questions about the cost of the waste.
2024-10-22
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The speaker's style is formal, analytical, and authoritative, particularly when responding to questions and correcting the opposing side's assertions. Strong emphasis is placed on logical arguments, economic timing, and the presentation of data, while avoiding emotional appeals. He/She employs direct correction to refute the opposing side's claims (e.g., the assertion that consumers ultimately bear the tax burden is not a counterargument against implementing the tax).
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The style is formal, inquisitive, and analytical, addressing the minister directly. Logical argumentation is employed to emphasize the importance of consistency in budgetary decisions and potential cost savings. Rhetorical emphasis ("Vaat nii!") is used to highlight the reallocation of budgetary funds.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style is formal and interrogative, addressing the presenter with respect while posing a substantive challenge. The rhetoric is logical and analytical, focusing on the demand for definitions and criteria ("What are these criteria?", "Why is a landscaping investment bad?"). Emotional appeals are absent; the emphasis is on procedural clarity.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, procedural, and data-driven, especially when presenting the work of the commission, where emphasis is placed on consensus decisions and deadlines. When questions are posed, the tone is critical and skeptical, requiring the Ministry of Finance to evaluate specific policy outcomes.
2024-05-30
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and data-driven, focusing on logical comparison and facts. The speaker presents their criticism in the form of a question, seeking clarification from the presenter regarding negative trends and the success stories of other countries.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is predominantly formal and substantive, especially in the section concerning the committee presentation, where he/she provides a fact-based overview of the discussion. When addressing economic topics, the tone is analytical and logical, focusing on the relationship between market conditions and regulation. When procedural boundaries are exceeded, he/she directs the questioner to the next opportunity for debate ("the round of negotiations"), thereby maintaining strict order.
2024-05-02
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, logical, and demanding, centered on the absence of specific data and answers. The speaker poses questions in succession to highlight the deficiencies in the preparation of the proposal, relying on a data-driven appeal rather than an emotional one. The tone is critical, particularly concerning the failure to deliver on promises (no responses have been sent).
2024-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, direct, and policy-focused, relying on logical argumentation. The speaker begins courteously but immediately expresses disagreement with both the previous questioner and the minister. Rhetorical questions are employed to draw attention to the minister's inaction in solving long-term problems.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and procedural, especially when presenting the summary of the finance committee's discussion. The speaker appeals to logic and facts, presenting technical details and raising questions about possible negative consequences. The tone is objective and informative, focusing on explaining the content and procedure of the legislation.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and direct, emphasizing the seriousness and topicality of the issue ("Truly, this is a serious matter"). A logical appeal is employed, describing the negative impact of bureaucracy and the creation of new positions. The speech concludes with a clear question demanding a solution, addressed to the Minister.