By Plenary Sessions: Andre Hanimägi

The rhetorical style is serious, formal, and logical, emphasizing the pragmatic need for security while balancing it with humanitarian values. Fact-based arguments are employed, citing the decisions of neighboring countries and the experience of Ukraine to justify withdrawal from the convention. The address is directed both to colleagues in the Riigikogu and to "foreign friends," delivering a clear message regarding Estonia's will to defend itself.

The style is formal, analytical, and procedural, focusing on summarizing the commission's deliberations and legal disputes. It strives to maintain neutrality and logical argumentation, while simultaneously offering a sharp response to political rhetoric (e.g., the accusation that the state is fighting nuns). It repeatedly emphasizes that the law's objective is to prevent influence activities, not to restrict religious freedom.

The rhetorical style is questioning and concerned, focusing on logical and procedural arguments regarding political accountability and budget assurance. Formal language is employed, and the minister is addressed directly, demanding clarification concerning the political levers. The tone is analytical, not emotional.

The style is formal, analytical, and cautious, relying on logical arguments and statistics. The speaker repeatedly poses probing questions to the minister to ascertain the government's true objective (bureaucracy versus the increase in arms). He/She references foreign practices and studies to underscore the gravity of his/her position and the potential risks involved.

The style is formal and constructive, respectfully addressing the Deputy Speaker and the Minister. The speaker employs moral and emotional appeals, highlighting the despicable nature of defrauding the elderly. Nevertheless, the presentation remains logical, offering concrete political solutions (the creation of an action plan) and requesting the ministry's input.

The rhetorical style is formal and direct, posing several specific and pointed questions to the minister. The tone is demanding and focuses on achieving transparency, especially regarding the "brutal cuts" articulated by the coalition partner.

The speaker's style is direct, critical, and demanding, utilizing rhetorical questions to criticize the government's inaction and delays (e.g., the sarcastic phrase "a long time coming, a beautiful thing"). The emphasis is placed on logical argumentation and the demand that political decisions be substantiated by thorough analyses, rather than mere political "waffling" or "fuss." The overall tone is one of concern regarding the regional policy consequences.