By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

All speeches were delivered during a single plenary session, indicating active engagement in current affairs debates. The speaker participated in discussions concerning both social legislation and matters of economic policy, addressing Ministers (Ligi, Michal, Sikkut) directly.

An active participant in the Riigikogu information session, where they posed repeated and clarifying questions regarding a specific security incident. They also demonstrated initiative by demanding adherence to the procedural rules of the sitting, expressing disappointment over the restriction of their allotted questioning time.

The speaker actively participates in the plenary session, repeatedly and consistently raising the same fundamental question regarding the voters' mandate. This demonstrates great tenacity in the debate and the submission of procedural questions to the presiding officer when answers are not received.

Patterns of activity indicate participation in plenary sessions within the framework of interpellations, posing critical questions regarding the government's actions. One mention refers to being late for a session, which suggests potentially variable participation.

The speaker has actively participated in the sessions of the Legal Committee and the Constitutional Committee, observing the discussions even without speaking rights. He has consistently spoken at the podium (during the first, second, and third readings) on the topic of the draft bill considered unconstitutional, showing persistent engagement with the subject.

The patterns of activity include active participation in the work of Riigikogu committees, referencing attendance at the joint session of the Legal Committee and the Constitutional Committee. The speaker uses the information hour as a platform to pressure the Prime Minister and consistently raise the issue of the illegal camera network. A conversation with former Minister of the Interior Mart Helme is also mentioned.

The speaker actively participates in the plenary debate following the Minister of Justice's report, raising repeated questions and comments. It is noted that there was no opportunity to hear the introduction of the draft legislation in the committee, which points to the necessity of utilizing the plenary time to present views and provide systematic commentary.

The speaker was highly active during the session, posing questions and engaging in debates on several diverse topics (social welfare, national defense, the Name Act) all within one day. He also referenced the Minister's upcoming visit to Finland, recommending that the system there be studied.

Active in the plenary debates, posing questions to the Minister of Justice and utilizing the limited time available to address two significant issues. This demonstrates proactivity, as evidenced by the reference to a specific proposal he submitted to the Riigikogu Board "a few days ago" concerning changes to the procedure for placing draft legislation on the agenda.

The speaker actively participates in plenary sessions, posing questions and engaging in debates concerning the processing of draft legislation and economic analyses. All presentations occurred on a single day, suggesting active involvement in the discussion of that specific bill.

The speaker actively participates in the Riigikogu information hour, addressing the same issue across multiple rounds, which points to a persistent and focused effort to pressure the government. This pattern of activity demonstrates a repeated demand for answers to specific questions concerning security and constitutionality.

The speaker was highly active during the session, repeatedly raising questions and points of order, and delivering a comprehensive closing address regarding one of the draft bills. He/She pays close attention to the details of the explanatory memorandum and demands the leadership intervene to raise the standards for processing government legislation.