By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler
Total Sessions: 131
Fully Profiled: 131
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, VI Session, Plenary Sitting
The speaking style is predominantly combative, skeptical, and critical, frequently employing rhetorical questions and irony (e.g., referring to the minister as a "world-beater" or the draft legislation as an "ego project"). Appeals are made to logic, long-term economic stability, and national interests, challenging the underlying assumptions of the government's policy. The tone is formal, but includes sharp personal remarks.
2025-10-15
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Information Hour
Toon is critical, demanding, and at times ironic, particularly when addressing the Prime Minister, whom he accuses of selecting the wrong experts and failing to provide an adequate information package. He employs logical appeals, relying on documents and examples drawn from foreign countries (Spain, Poland). His questions are often presented as direct recommendations or demands aimed at altering the government's action plan.
2025-10-13
15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is predominantly critical and at times combative, particularly regarding opponents and the centralization of the European Union. The discourse employs both logical, data-driven questions (such as Elering’s financial status) and strong ideological assessments (e.g., "technocrats," "embarrassing"), and specific confirmations and promises are demanded from the ministers.
2025-10-08
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The speaker employs an extremely aggressive, accusatory, and uncompromising style, utilizing strong metaphors and labeling ("mumbo-jumbo," "moral degenerates," "steamroller government," "heads should roll"). He balances logical appeals (budget figures, legal statutes) with emotional and value-based calls, particularly regarding culture and the green transition. The tone is ironic and sarcastic, especially when responding to ministers and criticizing the naivety of coalition politicians.
2025-10-07
The 15th Riigikogu, 6th Session, Plenary Sitting
The style is formal, yet sharply interrogative and challenging, using the minister's previous quotes (e.g., "Excel Man" vs. "Word Man") to demand accountability. The speaker employs loaded language ("crazy ideas," "courage") and presents hypothetical scenarios to expose the minister's ideological positions and management style. The tone is skeptical and demanding.
2025-09-22
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The style is combative, critical, and forceful, utilizing strong ideological terminology such as "green frenzy" (or "eco-hysteria") and "craving for totalitarianism." It relies on international news and real-life examples to bolster its conservative and anti-government message. It maintains formal language usage but incorporates emotional appeals directed at voters.
2025-09-17
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, critical, and at times personal, employing colorful metaphors (e.g., "greyhounds chasing a rabbit," "the dustbin of history"). The tone is anxious and cautionary, highlighting the symptoms of a democracy crisis, but it also includes humor (the theme of pushing a button). The speaker advocates for brevity and concreteness, suggesting Charles Bukowski's poems as practice material for achieving this.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is confrontational and personal, focusing on sharply criticizing the opponent's communication style and contrasting the respective styles. Colorful and blunt expressions ("you blurted out," "political broiler") are employed, along with narrative elements (Pevkur's example), to illustrate the speaker's position. The speaker also utilizes a rhetorical device, accusing the minister of bringing up the topic of threatening self-defense, a subject that was not covered in the original question.
2025-09-10
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is highly combative and accusatory, focusing on the opponent's personal dishonesty and incompetence, and directly calling him a liar and a puppet. The speaker relies heavily on logical arguments, reading out excerpts from the State Audit Office report and yesterday's transcript to substantiate his claims with facts. Historical examples (2014, 2019) are also used for the introduction and to establish context.
2025-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive and skeptical, employing irony and direct personal accusations aimed at the minister (e.g., calling him a "marionette"). The speaker relies on facts (the State Audit Office report) but presents them as emotionally charged rhetorical questions designed to call the minister's integrity and competence into question.
2025-09-08
15th Riigikogu, 6th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, combative, and forceful, employing strong ideological terms such as "liberal-democratic totalitarianism" and "bastard language." The argumentation relies heavily on statistical data and logical appeals, but also uses dramatic comparisons (George Orwell) to characterize the government's actions. The speaker admonishes colleagues and ministers, calling into question their credibility and the soundness of their decisions.
2025-09-04
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The style of rhetoric is predominantly combative, direct, and sharply critical, especially towards the Riigikogu board and the ministers. Sarcasm and irony are often employed (e.g., suggesting the closure of the legal department because laws are not being followed, or referencing the Prime Minister's walk in Kadriorg). Logical arguments and procedural details are frequently intertwined with emotional accusations (e.g., labeling the board's actions as "cowardly and base").
2025-06-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is highly combative, accusatory, and forceful, employing sharp and emotional language (e.g., "lied to you," "childish prattle," "sleepwalkers," "flock of sheep"). The speaker directly appeals to the conscience of the coalition MPs, urging them to vote against the measure, while simultaneously highlighting the logical deficiencies in the draft legislation and the absence of control mechanisms.
2025-06-18
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is questioning, critical, and at times confrontational, utilizing rhetorical questions and direct addresses (Aivar!) aimed at the bill's presenter. The speaker relies on anecdotal evidence (the purchase of a jeep, the posting of a video) and personal perceptions to expose the opposing side's inconsistencies and political maneuvering.
2025-06-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and blunt, explicitly accusing the presenter of lying and contradictions. Strong emotional appeals are used, warning against the jeopardizing of democracy and the "deep state," and emphasizing that the government is "tightening the screws." The speaker also uses the cultural analogy of the "kratt" to illustrate the tireless work of artificial intelligence.
2025-06-16
XV Riigikogu, V Session, Plenary Sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, provocative, and often confrontational, employing rhetorical questions to expose the government's illogic ("backward logic"). The speaker emphasizes personal experience (as a rural person) and offers predictions regarding future political developments across Europe. The style also incorporates personal references concerning the minister's prior business ventures.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
He/She employs a sharp, sarcastic, and occasionally humorous tone, especially when exposing the demagoguery of opponents and ridiculing the activities of the ERJK (Committee for Supervising Party Financing). Alongside logical arguments and technical data, he/she prefers practical examples and personal anecdotes (the punk festival, the visit to Sopi-Tootsi) to illustrate the sheer absurdity of bureaucracy and politics. The style is direct and strives for accessibility to the general public, often utilizing colloquial expressions.
2025-06-04
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is confrontational, direct, and procedurally critical. The speaker demands simple yes/no answers and criticizes the Prime Minister for leveraging his position of power when addressing procedural matters. The follow-up question concludes with a sharp challenge, casting doubt on the credibility of either the Latvian counterpart or the Prime Minister himself.
2025-05-21
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The tone is predominantly confrontational, critical, and self-assured, highlighting his earlier prescience ("Epler was right"). He employs both logical arguments (economic calculations) and personal attacks, criticizing the minister's report as "boring talk" and accusing his Reform Party colleagues of political technology/spin and outright lying. He utilizes Estonian proverbs and irony (e.g., "you break into an open door").
2025-05-19
15th Riigikogu, Fifth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical, at times ironic, and demanding, particularly toward the Prime Minister, who is accused of failing to answer questions and presenting inadequate general figures. It employs both logical argumentation derived from research and emotional assessments, describing the situation as "completely absurd" and the Prime Minister as a man "with a sad and emotionless demeanor." The text concludes with a direct call for resignation due to the weakness of the political leadership.
2025-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The speaker’s style is predominantly combative, critical, and sarcastic, accusing opponents (including officials) of lying, misleading, and spouting nonsense. He draws on strong historical parallels (the Soviet Union, Lysenkoism, the nationalization of the 1940s) and uses concepts such as "virtue signaling." His appeals are primarily logical and economic, contrasting physics and mathematics with ideology.
2025-05-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting.
The rhetorical style is combative, accusatory, and direct, calling the minister an "adept demagogue" and criticizing the inadequacy of the responses. Logical arguments are employed concerning laws and procedures (discretionary power), but the tone is sharp and politically charged, linking various scandals (cameras, name changes) to the issue of weak leadership.
2025-05-07
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The tone is predominantly combative, sharp, and accusatory, utilizing strong metaphors ("steamroller," "a knife in the back," "fuzziness"). It appeals to facts and logic, contrasting them with the coalition's "fantasy projects" and "vague rhetoric." It uses procedural questions to control the debate and engages in personal attacks (calling a colleague a "sloppy populist").
2025-04-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The speaker's style is analytical, fact-based, and strongly critical, accusing opponents of talking "fluff" and ignoring "factual reality." He uses irony and sharp metaphors (e.g., calling the government "Simpletons") to emphasize the illogical nature of the policy. His appeals are primarily logical and economic, relying on calculations and international examples (Germany, California) to expose the shortcomings of the green narrative.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is predominantly critical and confrontational, especially concerning the political motives and past decisions of opponents. Logical arguments, cost calculations, and historical examples (the former deputy chancellor) are employed, alongside sharp phrases ("political spin," "the Socs' mantra"). The tone is self-assured and occasionally sarcastic, warning against naivety when creating legislative loopholes.
2025-04-23
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, ironic, and confrontational, employing figurative metaphors (e.g., Estonia 200 described as an "overworked and underpaid foreign worker"). The speaker levels strong accusations against both the prime minister (Michal) and the session chair, criticizing the latter for violating procedural rules. The overall tone is demanding and expresses protest.
2025-04-17
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The tone of the speech is combative, critical, and occasionally sarcastic, particularly aimed at the government and the Minister of Finance, whose viewpoints are labeled "sad reality" and "whining." It utilizes both logical arguments (citing examples from Great Britain and Ireland) and emotional, personal attacks (referencing the Finance Minister's fondness for humanities and philosophy). The style is straightforward, accusing opponents of engaging in political theater and implementing foolish policies.
2025-04-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is direct, aggressive, and critical, questioning the prime minister's role and competence (implying they completely failed to meet the required standard). Figurative expressions are used (e.g., "they brush their teeth in the morning, open their inbox, and there's the tablet of commandments") along with a call to "take the bull by the horns." The appeals combine economic arguments (the zero price point) with a call for common sense and introspection.
2025-04-09
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly combative and critical, especially towards former coalition partners (the Social Democrats, the Reform Party), who are accused of hypocrisy and lying. Strong emotional terms are used, such as "robber capitalism" and "to bring down the tax axe on people's backs," but at the same time, logical arguments are presented regarding the predictability of the bank tax framework.
2025-04-09
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is confrontational and critical, employing strong accusations such as "demagoguery" and "duplicity." The speaker utilizes detailed counterarguments to expose the opponent's alleged dishonesty, referencing specific US media outlets and political events. The tone is formal, yet sharp and accusatory in substance.
2025-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The style is predominantly confrontational and demanding, especially concerning the repeated questions put to the minister that went unanswered. It employs direct accusations (lying) against political opponents and raises rhetorical questions regarding the government's competence. There is also a brief procedural question about adjourning the session.
2025-03-24
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is direct, aggressive, and ideologically charged, accusing the opponent of unethical conduct and advocating for a planned economy. The text employs repetitive phrases ("Repetition is the mother of wisdom") and ironic allusions ("a beautiful fairy tale"). Logical arguments (cost analysis and international examples) are interwoven with personal and partisan accusations to emphasize the opposing side's dishonesty.
2025-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and skeptical, utilizing the prime minister’s past quotes (complete with dates and figures) to expose contradictions. The speaker employs accusatory metaphors ("weather vane," "political technologist") and repeatedly raises questions about the absence of a grand plan, stressing the logical inconsistency.
2025-03-18
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fifth sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, confrontational, and often personal, questioning the motives of opponents (e.g., personal gain versus snap elections). Sarcasm and juxtaposition are employed, for instance, comparing the Minister of Education's "one door" rhetoric with the "one window" approach for foreign labor, and hinting at the speaker's discomfort with political engagement. The language used is formal, but the content is aggressive.
2025-03-17
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and aggressive, employing powerful metaphors (e.g., labeling Eesti 200 a money-guzzling black hole). The speaker merges mathematical and logical analysis (based on current ratings/polls) with a powerful emotional appeal (highlighting the injustice faced by families with children). Direct accusations of lying and abandoning core principles are utilized.
2025-02-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, accusatory, and skeptical, employing strong terms such as "fumbling and lying" and "Reform Party illiberalism." The speaker points out logical inconsistencies (the socialization of costs versus the loosening of state aid), but does so sarcastically, even personally, by questioning the comprehension skills of a colleague (Igor Taro) and offering him remedial courses.
2025-02-25
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, provocative, and heavily metaphorical, employing the imagery of the Republic Day concert and the Zetod song "Pohmela" (Hangover). The speaker utilizes an emotional appeal and vulgarity ("a taste of shit in the mouth") to deliver a sharp message to the coalition regarding political incompetence and to demand that they sober up.
2025-02-12
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and demanding, employing strong and personal phrases such as "you are lying" and "stupid decisions." The speaker demands courage and resolve from the Prime Minister and uses emotional appeals, referencing the whiff of corruption and the country's increasing impoverishment. The style is direct and confrontational, even beginning with procedural criticism directed at the presiding officer.
2025-02-11
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary sitting
The speaker's style is sharp, critical, and combative, focusing on exposing the hypocrisy of opponents, especially "liberals." He uses irony (such as not reading the foreign minister's social media) and direct quotes to underscore his arguments regarding the ministers' unsuitability. The tone is concerned and direct, highlighting the danger of damaging allied relations.
2025-01-29
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is concerned, critical, and direct, beginning with the statement that the speaker is "a little concerned." The speaker employs logical arguments based on concrete examples of the actions of government members (Ligi, Tsahkna) and the resulting media coverage. Strong language is used, such as "ridiculed" and "outcry," to describe the opposing side's actions, thereby calling the government's competence into question.
2025-01-28
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, addressing the minister and colleagues directly. The speaker relies on logical arguments and seeks specific data (e.g., regarding the scale of abuse or financial involvement) to deepen the discussion. The tone is considered and information-seeking, aiming to educate both themselves and the listeners.
2025-01-27
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is formal, analytical, and challenging, especially when addressing the chair. The speaker employs logical argumentation, demanding clarity and a consistent approach in procedural matters, while avoiding emotional appeals. In the introduction to social topics, the speaker adopts a cautionary tone, describing the narrative of scientific consensus as dangerous.
2025-01-22
15th Estonian Parliament, 5th session, plenary session.
The style is predominantly combative, critical, and at times sarcastic, particularly when describing the actions of the coalition partners (the Social Democrats). The speaker employs both emotional appeals (references to empty stomachs and patriotism) and logical arguments and statistics (inflation figures, the cost of living compared to Tokyo). The speaker is frank and uses strong language (e.g., "stupid spending," "it's getting ridiculous").
2025-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing
The speaker's rhetorical style is combative, challenging, and sharp, calling on the minister to be "brave" and to "actually get something done." He uses logical parallels (fuel excise duty) and international comparisons to support his argument regarding the benefits of a tax cut. The speech concludes with a sharp attack, referencing the prime minister's quote about the foolishness of the government's actions.
2025-01-21
15th Riigikogu, 5th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is skeptical, critical, and occasionally ironic, employing highly charged emotional terms such as "absurd," "utter nonsense," and "green frenzy." In addition to logical arguments, the speaker relies on illustrative examples and hypothetical scenarios (such as the loss of 10% in subsidies) to underscore the futility of the regulations. He also draws a historical parallel, referencing the Estonian capacity to implement foolish policies with German precision, in order to criticize the current transposition of European regulations.
2025-01-20
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, accusing ministers of self-deception and dishonesty, and of living in a "fantasy world." Strong moral and emotional appeals are utilized (focusing on normality and stress levels), combining them with references to dry statistics and tax hikes. The concluding tone is urgent, calling for the immediate collapse of the "woke world" and the restoration of normality.
2025-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, information briefing
The rhetorical style is confident, provocative, and at times personal, especially when addressing the Prime Minister (referencing the PM's agreement with his earlier writings). He employs strong metaphors, calling the Social Democrats "a weight chained to the country's development," and demands "more vigorous leadership." The appeals are a mix of political pressure, logical arguments, and soliciting personal opinion.
2025-01-14
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is direct and challenging, utilizing rhetorical questions to underscore the inequality of transparency standards. The government's stance is sharply criticized, labeled as "technocratic" and "pulled out of thin air." The speaker calls for a substantive debate, grounding the arguments in logical consistency and fairness.
2025-01-13
15th Riigikogu, 5th session, plenary session
The style is sharp, critical, and often ironic, employing analogies (the simpletons/Schilda fools) and metaphors (a fairy tale). The speaker accuses the government of weak political leadership ("a state run by officials") and bravado (in its preparation for desynchronization). He calls on the Prime Minister to boldly and swiftly revise his current views, also offering the option of handing over leadership to others.
2024-12-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly critical, combative, and direct, employing strong judgmental language (e.g., "mess," "to grab/hoard"). Rhetorical questions are directed at the minister to highlight the contradictions between his words and actions. The author appeals to logic, criticizing the government for rushing the process and subsequently "fiddling" with amendments.
2024-12-04
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The tone is predominantly combative, critical, and at times provocative, employing strong and condemnatory language. It accuses opponents of demagoguery and hypocrisy, particularly regarding excise duties and the green transition. It utilizes both logical arguments (such as OECD forecasts and statistics) and emotional appeals, focusing attention on specific details (e.g., the pronunciation of a name) and procedural mistakes.
2024-12-03
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is formal and question-oriented, focusing on logical clarity regarding the details of international financing and the wording of the draft bill. Furthermore, the presentation includes an atypical, slightly personal, and humorous digression, in which the minister is asked to justify comments made about attire (tie clips).
2024-11-21
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, confrontational, and accusatory, often employing sarcasm and personal attacks to cast doubt on opponents' motives and competence. Alongside logical arguments, it favors emotional contrasts, for instance, contrasting the luxury of the elite (orange juice, cocoa) with the daily necessity of poor people buying bread. It uses ironic examples (cutting open a toothpaste tube, the beard tax) to ridicule arguments.
2024-11-20
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The speaking style is inquisitive, demanding, and at times rhetorical, seeking simple and clear answers. A challenging tone is employed, particularly when referencing the "ideal world" and linking the failure to meet political objectives to the composition of the coalition. The delivery is formal, addressing both the session chair and the rapporteur.
2024-11-20
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is analytical, concrete, and forceful, relying heavily on data and figures to highlight the government's incompetence and misplaced priorities. The tone is critical, posing direct questions to the Prime Minister and demanding specific forecasts regarding the timeline and size of the supplementary budget. Logical contrasts are employed (e.g., €50,000 for the nuclear regulator versus €600,000 for ornithologists) to demonstrate the irrationality of the spending.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session.
The tone is predominantly combative, critical, and ironic, employing strong contrasts (real life vs. fantasy world). It accuses the government and its PR departments of "whitewashing the truth" and flooding the media with "paid announcements." It appeals both to logic (improving the budgetary position) and to emotion (cuts to social spending), calling on the public to verify the state's open data themselves.
2024-11-13
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is combative and accusatory, charging the prime minister with avoiding uncomfortable questions and dishonesty, since the answers would contradict previous positions. Strong and loaded expressions are used (e.g., "climate hysteria," "opposition tainted by corruption," "brainwashing"), and the necessity of facing reality, rather than relying on mere perceptions, is emphasized.
2024-11-11
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The speaker adopts a style that is overwhelmingly combative, critical, and passionate, particularly when tackling issues of political integrity and the economy. They employ powerful emotional appeals, citing, for instance, the plight of the "Nõmme granny" and the hardships faced by families, while balancing this with references to specific legislative amendments and statistical data. Sharp phrases, such as "lying politicians" and "smoke and mirrors," are utilized to discredit their opponents.
2024-11-06
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is questioning and critical, focusing on details and procedural fairness. A personal historical reference ("the face of the campaign") is used toward the tax rapporteur to emphasize the thoroughness of the tax. The speaker demands clear argumentation instead of passionate opposition, suggesting that the committee's work may have been rushed.
2024-11-06
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is directly questioning and challenging, demanding that the Prime Minister rapidly revise his policy. Logical argumentation is employed, drawing upon the international political context and economic concerns (the loss of competitiveness).
2024-11-05
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, skeptical, and demanding, expressing surprise at the Prime Minister's optimistic tone. The speaker accuses the government of living in a world where "everything is already just fine," and uses questions to demand a serious approach and a concrete plan.
2024-11-04
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and confrontational, employing strong expressions (e.g., "to a forceful surge," "choking off momentum"). The speaker emphasizes the logical connection between negative trends and the government's actions, questioning the alignment between the coalition's rhetoric and its actual deeds. A personal attack is also leveled against a former colleague, criticizing his political change of direction.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The speaking style is highly combative, direct, and accusatory, employing sharp phrases such as "Putinistic narrative" and "the red, eastward-looking face." The speaker frequently relies on quoting transcripts and raising procedural questions, but also incorporates personal and regional anecdotes (bog restoration) and vivid figurative expressions (Pandora's Box) to illustrate political and social dangers.
2024-10-23
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is confrontational, demanding, and repetitive, particularly when pressing the Prime Minister for answers concerning the suitability of ministers. Both logical argumentation (such as energy cost calculations) and sharp moral judgments are employed, accusing opponents of lying and using Putinist rhetoric.
2024-10-22
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and accusatory, utilizing illustrative examples (such as the bankers' visit to Stenbock House) to underscore the agreement between the government and the banks. Strong terminology, such as "demagogy" and "the deal was done," is employed, and the integrity of both experts and politicians is called into question. When posing questions, there is a clear intent to broaden the scope of the discussion rather than being confined to narrow answers.
2024-10-21
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, especially when addressing ministers. Strong emotional language and direct accusations are leveled at the opposition, calling the minister's replies "embarrassing drivel" and accusing him of "shameless lying." While the emphasis is placed on logical arguments and referencing facts (transcripts, statistics), the ultimate goal is to discredit the opponent both politically and personally.
2024-10-16
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting
The style is analytical, critical, and at times confrontational, demanding simple and concrete answers from the ministers and labeling one minister's analogy "somewhat foolish." Strong logical arguments are employed, relying on data and official documents to highlight the government's waste and incompetence. He/She concludes one speech on an optimistic note, promising to submit an amendment proposal.
2024-10-15
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The speaker employs an analytical style that is simultaneously sharply critical and occasionally ironic, utilizing powerful metaphors ("stepping on the rake," "Putin takes the dividend"). He balances logical argumentation (citing data and documents) with emotional appeal (specifically, opposing the labeling of his critique as mere "whining") and presents his viewpoints confidently and in a confrontational manner.
2024-10-14
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary sitting
The tone is predominantly critical, demanding, and deeply concerned, particularly regarding demography and family security, where the minister is pressed for a direct answer. Strong emotional and negative analogies (such as "banana republic") are employed to criticize the appointment procedure for senior officials and the overall unethical optics. The style remains formal, yet it includes pointed accusations of demagoguery and evasion of questions.
2024-10-09
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Fourth Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and interrogative, directed at the Minister and the Chair of the session. The speaker relies on logical arguments and data verification, referencing explanatory memoranda and specific sections of the law directly. The tone is insistent, focusing on assessing the substantive impact and achieving financial clarity.
2024-10-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is formal, demanding, and directly confrontational, as questions are posed to the Minister of Defense. The speaker relies on logical argumentation and the citation of external sources to compel the minister to answer more specifically and elaborate on his previous statements. Light irony is employed, referencing a potential report made by a ministry employee to Kapo, which suggests underlying political tension.
2024-10-08
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and inquiry-driven, aimed directly at the minister to obtain clarification. The tone is analytical and skeptical, focusing on highlighting logical inconsistencies (the ratio between the budget and the number of officials) and potential risks (uncertainty in contracts).
2024-10-07
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and at times ironic, particularly when summarizing the arguments presented by the minister, which are dismissed as empty slogans ("a priority must be set"). Logical appeals are employed to highlight the contradictions within the government's budget, while simultaneously posing direct questions about the consequences (fines, failure to meet obligations).
2024-09-25
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary session
The style is predominantly combative and forceful, especially on economic topics, warning that incorrect decisions will lead to "poverty" and constitute a "dead end." He uses repetition and simplification to make his message understandable to the coalition members. Regarding social issues, he employs provocative hypothetical examples (entering a changing room, hitting back/retaliating) to illustrate the absurdity and danger of the new definitions.
2024-09-24
15th Riigikogu, 4th sitting, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is predominantly confrontational, demanding, and procedurally sharp. The speaker poses pointed questions, accusing the minister of concealment and offensive behavior, and submits an official protest to the session chair for violating order. Both logical argumentation (the demand for data) and personal insinuations (the minister's age and memory) are employed.
2024-09-18
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and ironic, employing powerful metaphors ("fools," "rolling logs uphill") to ridicule the government's actions. The appeal is made to logic and common sense, particularly concerning costs and efficiency ("as every idiot can see"), while simultaneously criticizing the passivity and lack of expertise among coalition members.
2024-09-16
The 15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary sitting.
The speaker’s style is combative and accusatory, employing sharp rhetoric and sarcasm, particularly when challenging the minister's credibility regarding public support. Emotional appeals are utilized (e.g., "plundering from the bottom up," "class hatred narrative"), and the necessity of officially recording the opposition/dissent in the transcript is stressed.
2024-09-11
Fifteenth Riigikogu, fourth session, plenary session
The style is formal, respectful (e.g., "Thank you, good Presiding Officer!" "Mr. Minister!"), and analytical. The argumentation relies purely on logic, repeatedly stressing the absence of "economic logic" in the Minister's response. The tone is interrogative and aimed at eliciting a detailed explanation of the policy vision.
2024-09-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 4th session, press briefing.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and direct, accusing the Prime Minister of misleading the public and demanding a clear justification for the confiscation. Both logical arguments (referencing expert analysis and the law's original intent) and dramatic imagery (such as the comparison to a science fiction novel and a "thought crime") are used to underscore the danger inherent in this legal precedent. The tone is formal, yet highly adversarial.
2024-09-09
15th Riigikogu, 4th session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is skeptical and critical, demanding concrete answers and figures from ministers, particularly when dealing with financial issues. Direct quotes and rhetorical questions are employed to underscore the unreality of the government's promises ("Where exactly is he going to conjure up that money?"). The text concludes with a procedural note aimed at ensuring mathematical accuracy in the official transcript, thereby highlighting the critical importance of detail.
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is interrogative, persistent, and ultimately confrontational, as the speaker repeatedly returns to the same questions. Sarcasm is employed (referencing a previous "witch hunt" or "smear campaign") and a direct challenge is issued to the press (throwing down the gauntlet) to expose the minister's past actions. The tone is formal, but sharp in content and politically charged.
2024-07-29
The 15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu.
The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, focusing on precision and citation ("I believe I am quoting accurately"). The tone is analytical, seeking to resolve procedural ambiguity through logical reasoning. The address to the session chair is polite ("Thank you, good session chair!").
2024-07-29
15th Riigikogu, extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and at times alarmist, accusing the coalition of anti-state activity and engaging in the "theater of the absurd." It employs both logical arguments (such as the lack of impact analysis and the ambiguity regarding the purpose of the taxes) and strong emotional and moralizing appeals (including calls for finding a conscience and warnings about people moving away from Estonia). Opponents are labeled as arrogant and as repeating Kremlin talking points.
2024-07-22
15th Riigikogu, Riigikogu's extraordinary session.
The rhetorical style is polemical and intensely sarcastic, employing ironic acknowledgment aimed at the prime ministerial candidate ("It's something, at least. We'll proceed step by step."). Sharp comparisons are utilized (the PM candidate as "the new Kaja Kallas, just a man") and concrete examples (a dance festival funded by the Just Transition Fund) to express profound distrust.
2024-07-15
15th Riigikogu, Extraordinary session of the Riigikogu
The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and direct, utilizing strong emotional appeals and accusations. Irony is employed (e.g., making the tax "better," using scare quotes) alongside sharp metaphors, such as "scorching people out of the land" as part of the green transition. The speaker presents logical arguments regarding the economic recession but concludes the speech with a strong ethical and personal attack against the coalition's motives.
2024-06-12
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session.
The speaker's style is confident and, at times, combative, particularly on energy issues, where he accuses opponents of either lying or simply misunderstanding the subject. He uses strong, absolute phrases ("unquestionably the best," "absolutely superior") and employs both irony and Estonian proverbs ("omad vitsad peksavad"—roughly, "chickens coming home to roost") to criticize his adversaries. The overall tone is logical and well-argued, yet uncompromising.
2024-06-05
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is combative, accusatory, and sharp, employing strong expressions such as "you lied" and "despicable." Rhetorical questions and metaphors are used to create emotional impact (e.g., throwing money to the wind, taking poison). The style is formal, yet it includes sharp personal attacks and procedural protests directed at the presiding officer.
2024-06-03
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary sitting.
The style is formal, yet sharp, demanding, and probing, particularly concerning the repeated questions posed to the minister, where the aim is to prevent the evasion of an answer. A critical approach is employed, emphasizing the necessity for clarity and accountability, and reference is made to the limitations of the parliamentary format (the "desire for ping-ponging").
2024-05-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The speaker’s style is analytical, critical, and at times combative, especially during energy debates. He/She uses logical arguments and data (profitability ratios) but does not shy away from sharp retorts, for example, accusing a colleague of being unable to answer questions. He/She employs rhetorical questions and parallels to highlight the illogical nature and hypocrisy of opponents' positions.
2024-05-28
15th Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is sharply confrontational and accusatory, utilizing sarcasm and emotional narratives (the story of old lady Mari) to illustrate the government's dishonesty and falsehoods. The speaker criticizes both procedural corruption and political betrayal, all while adhering to the formal structure of a parliamentary address. They also make note of historical moments, such as Jürgen Ligi’s admission of error.
2024-05-27
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The speaker's style is combative, critical, and ideological, employing strong phrases such as "downward spiral" and "slogans akin to building communism." They use both logical arguments (the regressive impact of subsidies) and emotional appeals (referencing poverty and historical memory). Furthermore, procedural criticism is leveled regarding the behavior of the ministers and the emptiness of the chamber.
2024-05-14
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is questioning and concerned, presenting direct challenges to the minister regarding the policy's message and philosophical foundation ("What message does this send?"). It employs both technical political language (minimum requirement, additional funding) and a personal, emotional example—that of a stove-heated house—to illustrate how risk awareness is being raised. The tone is formal, but critical in substance.
2024-05-13
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is direct, sharp, and accusatory, focusing on questioning the minister's political motives. Rhetorical questions are employed to highlight the vagueness of the minister's responses and to suggest the deliberate creation of media hype. The tone is critical and demands straightforwardness.
2024-05-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone is critical and concerned, employing strong emotional language (for instance, describing the legislative framework as "sounding quite appalling"). The speaker utilizes logical argumentation and philosophical questions, such as the discussion surrounding the nature of democracy and the paradox of convenience. They also use comparisons (e.g., the narrative illustrating the importance of free speech) and attempt to shift the focus from the technical discussion to questions of trust and clarity.
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session.
The speaker’s style is highly combative and blunt, employing strong accusatory language such as "travesty of justice" and hinting at the presiding officer’s "lack of manhood" when dealing with the heavy artillery. The focus is on logical argumentation concerning procedural rules, but this is delivered alongside emotionally charged criticism. Figurative language is also used, for example, referring to the bank tax as a "whip."
2024-05-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is highly confrontational, demanding, and accusatory, emphasizing that the Prime Minister's actions are "very sad." The speaker sets strict conditions for the response and warns the Prime Minister against evasion, promising that otherwise they will not listen to "drivel." The style is formal, but the content is aggressive.
2024-05-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and confrontational, particularly when addressing the minister. Strong judgments and labeling are employed, describing the minister's positions as "pseudoscientific" and "ridiculing science." The appeals are primarily logical, relying on international examples (the United Kingdom, Latvia, Lithuania) and demanding political accountability.
2024-04-30
Fifteenth Riigikogu, Third Session, Plenary Session.
The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, polemical, and often ironic, utilizing sarcasm (e.g., the recommendation to abolish HÕNTE) and strong emotional appeals. He uses personal examples (his three sons) to emphasize the moral dimension of broken promises and accuses the government of "fleecing" the people. The speaker employs strong ideological terminology, referring to members of the coalition as "modern-day Reds."
2024-04-29
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, critical, and sharp, employing strong emotional expressions ("to insane ideas," "a death sentence," "the worst prime minister"). It relies on international sources and strongly opposes ideological policies, presenting its views as value-based and forceful criticism. It utilizes irony and direct personal attacks (Prime Minister Kallas).
2024-04-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is analytical, fact-based, and didactic, aiming to calm the public and correct misinformation. The speaker employs logical arguments and numerical comparisons, even suggesting practical steps (such as purchasing a dosimeter) to enhance understanding. The tone is professional and specific, focusing on data and historical examples.
2024-04-17
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is critical and probing, utilizing rhetorical questions to challenge the opposing side's viewpoints and push them to the point of absurdity. The speaker employs irony and sarcasm when describing the ideal vision of "efficient functioning," where the coalition votes on bills without any participation from the opposition. The tone is direct and challenging.
2024-04-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The speaker employs a critical and occasionally sarcastic rhetorical style, utilizing irony (for instance, colleague Ligi’s sincere belief in the weight of his vote). He/She uses logical analogies (notary, the election of the Riigikogu board, pension certification) to underscore the state's inconsistent standards, and bolsters his/her arguments with extensive quotations drawn from the feedback provided by interest groups (Eesti Energia, the Estonian Gas Association).
2024-04-15
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is critical, concerned, and demanding, especially in relation to safety and budget cuts. Irony is employed regarding the delay in responding to the inquiry ("the snowdrifts would have melted"), and logical arguments are relied upon, referencing specific accidents and feedback from road users. The speaker maintains a formal tone, addressing the Minister directly.
2024-04-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is highly confrontational, emotional, and sharply critical, expressing anger towards the government’s actions and accusing ministers of demagoguery and talking "stupid nonsense." It employs figurative and memorable phrases ("pouring money down the drain," "the airfield has been rigged") and accuses the presiding officer of suppressing the opposition's voice. The concept of "newspeak" is also utilized to criticize the government's terminology regarding social policy.
2024-04-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is courteous, modest, and straightforward, emphasizing the speaker's status as a young politician. The speaker prefers a quick and specific answer, requesting that long discussions be avoided in order to maintain a good tempo for the session. The tone is rather logical and information-seeking.
2024-04-03
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The address is formal and analytical, concentrating on posing questions and clarifying procedural details. References are utilized, citing colleagues' inquiries and the presenter's figurative expressions ("hills and valleys") to further develop the speaker's arguments. The tone is probing and focuses heavily on legal precision.
2024-04-03
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and concerned, particularly regarding security issues, employing cautionary examples (such as Germany) and logical argumentation. The tone is challenging toward the government, demanding explanations for both legislative inaction and decisions that weaken the state's resilience. Finally, a procedural protest is lodged against the Prime Minister's conduct.
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is direct, provocative, and at times confrontational, particularly when addressing a colleague who is criticized for lacking an opinion. He/She employs strong analogies (the prime minister's resignation, the wall of officials) to underscore his/her viewpoints and engages in meta-discussion, disputing the presenter's assessment of the tone of the question.
2024-03-20
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing.
The speaker's style is direct, critical, and occasionally confrontational, especially when accusing officials of lying and withholding information in Parliamentary committees. He employs strong language (e.g., "that pontification was inappropriate") and relies on logical arguments, contrasting officials' previous answers with plans that were later made public. While the initial address to the Minister of Culture is polite, the questions themselves are framed within a critical economic context.
2024-03-19
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone of the discourse is formal and apprehensive, centered on logical argumentation concerning the efficiency of state governance. A direct question is employed to elicit an evaluation of the efficacy of the debates and the formation of decisions, highlighting procedural uncertainty.
2024-03-18
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is investigative, skeptical, and at times provocative, using figurative comparisons (e.g., "drawers with name tags") to criticize the work of the Prosecutor's Office. The tone is formal, but includes sharp remarks and slight irony directed at political opponents, while the minister is praised for a specific answer concerning ornithology.
2024-03-12
15th Riigikogu, 3rd plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is critical and questioning, posing many rhetorical questions to challenge existing laws and situations. Strong emotional language is employed, referencing the public's "great indignation" and describing street protests as "uproar." The speaker rejects metaphors deemed inappropriate and favors logical argumentation, while simultaneously issuing a warning about the consequences of restrictions.
2024-03-11
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd session, plenary session
The tone is predominantly critical, confrontational, and at times ironic, especially when addressing the Prime Minister, whose positions are deemed completely out of touch with reality. The speaker employs both logical arguments (such as numerical examples illustrating family livelihoods) and strong ideological appeals, comparing the green transition and its consequences to a "Hunger Games" scenario. It is repeatedly stressed that the government fails to grasp the actual impact of its policies.
2024-03-07
Fifteenth Riigikogu, third sitting, plenary session
The style is analytical, critical, and at times ironic, calling into question the government's energy logic and the honesty of politicians. The speaker employs strong accusations (lying, spin/obfuscation) and highlights the logical contradiction between political slogans and economic reality. The overall tone is concerned and urgent regarding Estonia's competitiveness, relying primarily on economic rationality.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is analytical, formal, and focused on details, requiring specific legal and financial schemes. The tone is persistent and demanding, especially in ensuring that answers are received, repeating questions if the minister did not fully grasp them. It uses a brief compliment for the minister in the introduction, only to then present a critical or procedural requirement.
2024-03-06
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, press briefing
The style is confrontational, analytical, and incisive, focusing on the dubious nature of the Prime Minister's responses and the credibility of the sources. The speaker employs irony, quoting a humorist ("Questions are answerable, answers are questionable"), and is highly detailed, repeatedly posing questions and demanding precise clarification of the official transcript. The aim is to hold the Prime Minister accountable for rhetorical inconsistencies and self-referential statements.
2024-03-05
15th Estonian Parliament, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is argumentative, at times confrontational and insistent, particularly on the topic of energy policy, where he uses resolute statements ("It won't happen!", "it simply isn't true"). He relies on logical and historical appeals, citing, for example, France's 1974 nuclear program. The speaker is also procedurally precise, asking the session chair to clarify the allocation of questions to avoid confusion.
2024-03-04
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and confrontational, accusing the government of demagoguery and merely relaying the banks' PR talking points. Emotional expressions are utilized (e.g., "cognitive dissonance," "ugly and embarrassing to watch"), alongside simplified analogies (e.g., the fuel business) to explain economic phenomena. The overall tone is one of concern and inquiry, casting doubt on the prime minister's optimistic narrative.
2024-02-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary sitting
The tone is highly combative, ideological, and critical, especially directed at the opponents (the Social Democrats). The speaker employs sharp contrasts (entrepreneurship vs. redistribution) and demands a clear stance from the opposition. He levels strong accusations, referencing the opponents' rhetoric, which compares political parties to the mafia and Putinist Russia.
2024-02-21
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The style is formal ("good chairman/rapporteur"), but the substance is sharp and interrogative. Rhetorical questions are employed to cast doubt on the opponents' motives (e.g., fear of profit/loss aversion). In the third address, the rapporteur is accused of skillfully evading the core substance of the question, which demonstrates a desire to stick to the specific topic and hold them accountable.
2024-01-25
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The style is formal and logical, concentrating on the substantive simplicity and significance of the draft legislation while appealing to the concept of national wealth. However, the tone is critical and worried when he accuses officials of "making things up" and highlights the political resistance that impedes national development. The speaker employs rhetorical questions to draw attention to the political motives behind the opposition's rejection of the proposed bills.
2024-01-24
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is polite, formal, and constructive, utilizing addresses such as "Dear Chairman!" and "Mr. Minister!" The speaker appeals to a positive procedural culture and good will—referencing "pure luck and joy"—while simultaneously presenting his views on tax cuts and supporting draft legislation in a straightforward manner. He also makes note of the good pace of the session.
2024-01-23
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is direct and provocative, posing a pointed question to the Prime Minister about the results of the economic policy. An unusual metaphor ("the zero point of sexiness") is employed to assess economic attractiveness, which lends memorability to the delivery. The tone is critical and challenging.
2024-01-22
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, particularly concerning the government's actions and the resistance shown by the minister who refused to submit the economic analysis. Strong ideological references (World Economic Forum, Schwab) and comparisons ("the model of a rich Arab oil state") are employed. The appeals are a blend of a logical demand for economic analysis and an emotional plea to protect private property.
2024-01-16
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is formal, analytical, and inquisitive, addressing the session chair, rapporteurs, and ministers respectfully. The focus lies on logical and political argumentation, seeking to clarify the true objective of the draft legislation and evaluating its practical impact. The metaphor "toorik" (raw material/blank) is employed to describe the draft bill presented by the ministry, to which contributions are promised.
2024-01-15
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The style is often confrontational, critical, and ironic, using, for example, the word "vuristamine" (rattling off/babbling) to describe the prime minister's answers, and referring to Ansip as a "soda machine." Both logical arguments and statistics are employed, alongside emotional appeals (concern for the nation's mental health and the country's location on the Russian border). The tone is accusatory toward the government and expresses urgency regarding national crises.
2024-01-11
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary sitting
The style is analytical and procedure-centric, often employing questions to guide the discussion or critique incompetence. The speaker is forthright, acknowledging strong performances while simultaneously sharply criticizing colleagues for deviating from the substance of the law. The emphasis is placed on logic, systematic criticism, and adherence to good parliamentary practices.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session
The rhetorical style is formal and critical, particularly concerning the Reform Party's earlier promises, utilizing historical recollection. It balances logical arguments (specific tax rates) with a pragmatic approach, sequentially presenting various, progressively smaller tax cut proposals. The tone is consistent and persistent, aiming to achieve at least partial success.
2024-01-10
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, information briefing
The style is formal, analytical, and critical, relying on reliable sources and data to preempt the opposing side's objections. The tone is direct and assertive, while simultaneously incorporating political jabs and sarcasm, for instance, by referencing the accusation against Jüri Ratas or Mart Võrklaev’s perception regarding the public tolerance for tax increases.
2024-01-09
15th Riigikogu, 3rd session, plenary session
The rhetorical style is explanatory, yet simultaneously confrontational and direct, aimed at refuting accusations of obstruction. The speaker uses a personal address (Mr. Ligi) and demands his silence, which indicates a tense and precarious formality within the session hall.
2024-01-08
15th Riigikogu, 3rd sitting, plenary session.
The tone of the speech is critical and concerned, utilizing logical and data-driven arguments (index numbers, temperatures, historical examples). Figurative language is employed (e.g., the engine of the German locomotive is sputtering), and questions are posed to ministers to highlight the flaws in government policy. The style is formal, but the content is sharp and adversarial.