By Plenary Sessions: Jaak Aab

The style is formal and respectful ("Esteemed Chairman! Good Minister!"), but at the same time sharp and probing, especially concerning the background of political decisions. The speaker employs a logical appeal, referencing the work of the expert commission and previous standpoints, to call into question the current government's compromise. He/She begins with an acknowledgement ("long done and a beautiful thing") before posing the substantive questions.

The rhetorical style is analytical and critical, expressing concern over the ongoing inflation spiral and demanding solutions ("how we can actually get out of this"). The speaker employs logical argumentation, contrasting their position with the Minister of Finance's "rigidity" and preference for simplistic solutions. The tone is formal and appropriate for a plenary session.

The style is formal and respectful, addressing the rapporteurs with deference ("Honored Chairman," "Dear Riigikogu Speaker"). The speaker employs a logical and analytical approach, grounding the presentation of arguments in specific figures and historical proportions. The tone is inquisitive and demands clarification, seeking information regarding the reasons for the rejection of certain proposals.

The style is formal, courteous, and direct, respectfully addressing the Chairman and the Minister. The address is logical and centers on political substance, seeking confirmation regarding a specific funding issue. The speaker demonstrates procedural awareness, apologizing for the digression from the topic and noting that the agenda is not overly packed.

The style is formal and analytical, posing questions directly to ministers concerning the rationale and impact of political decisions. The tone is critical regarding tax policy, but also explanatory when there is a need to clarify the party's positions within the context of tax increases. Rhetorical questions are used to challenge the government's claims concerning economic competitiveness.

The rhetorical style is analytical, appropriately critical, and concerned, emphasizing the need for faster and better solutions to spur economic recovery. The speaker employs logical arguments, drawing on external examples (Lithuania) and personal experience gained in government cabinets, to highlight the links between security and the economy. He urges politicians to maintain balance in their communication and avoid going "over the top" with fear-mongering.

The speaking style is analytical, practical, and at times urgent, emphasizing the need to adapt to a "dynamic world." He employs logical arguments, criticizing bureaucratic delays and "pointless stages" in planning. The politician addresses the listeners directly ("Dear Estonian people") and uses clear and straightforward language when delivering criticism.

The style is critical and direct, raising questions about the government's tax policy decisions. It employs both rational arguments (economic consequences) and appeals to public opinion, specifically referencing a petition that garnered over 100,000 signatures. The tone is persuasive and stresses that this is an economic policy measure, not a populist move.

The rhetorical style is analytical and critical, relying heavily on the recommendations of international organizations (IMF, OECD) and external sources (Mihkel Nestor, Äripäev). The speaker employs logical argumentation to emphasize the necessity of changing the tax structure and expresses concern for public sector employees. The tone is formal and inquisitive.

The speech is formal and respectful, repeatedly addressing the esteemed Chairman/Presiding Officer and the Minister. The style is predominantly interrogative and analytical, focusing on identifying specific details and resources (financial, teachers) and providing background information in the interest of historical truth. Both an ideological framework (SDE principles) and historical examples (the Nordic school lunch) are utilized.