By Plenary Sessions: Helle-Moonika Helme

The rhetorical style is investigative, topic-expanding, and slightly provocative, introducing a subject into the discussion that deviates from the original focus of the draft bill. The speaker addresses the presenter personally and encouragingly ("Dear Hanah"), directing her, as a young person, to research the topic further. The argumentation relies on alleged historical facts and a logical connection to the subject of aviation fuel.

The speaker's style is insistent and concerned, particularly on language matters, emphasizing that the situation has deteriorated and requires immediate, "more stringent measures." He employs both logical arguments (constitutional right, the effect of inflation) and impactful metaphors ("fear factor," "nudging") with the aim of steering companies toward lawful conduct. The presentation is formal, addressing both colleagues and the public.

The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and sharp, employing strong expressions such as "war hysteria," "screwed up," and "insane talk." It utilizes the technique of mirroring the opponent's rhetoric ("I don't know what world you people live in") and rhetorical questions. Emotional appeals emphasize the negative impact on the country's reputation, investors, and the motivation of residents, often using ironic analogies (birthing machine, soda dispenser).

The style is sharply critical and combative, employing irony and highlighting oxymorons (e.g., "freedom is slavery," "tax increases leave people with more disposable income"). The speaker utilizes powerful emotional examples (such as multi-car pile-ups and the degradation of disabled individuals) and directly connects political decisions to the deterioration of people's everyday lives. The tone is frequently sarcastic, expressing profound outrage ("I genuinely don't know whether to laugh or cry").

The tone of the speech is formal, respectful, and appreciative toward the presenter, offering thanks for the thorough presentation. The emphasis is on a logical and questioning approach, centered on obtaining definitions for specific terminology (e.g., the value-based education gap).

The rhetorical style is businesslike and direct, yet confrontational when necessary, particularly concerning the ambiguity of the minister's answers and the judgments made by the session chair. Logical arguments are employed (economic growth, the threat of corruption), and the relevance of the debate is actively defended, with the chair's assertion regarding the asking of questions being deemed inappropriate.

The speaker adopts a combative, urgent, and sharply critical tone, particularly aimed at the prime minister, whom they accuse of dismissiveness toward questions and outright dishonesty ("Read my lips!"). Emotional imagery is employed (such as giving away the store or rolling in with a tank) and irony (the "soda machine" reference) to underscore the perilous nature of the government's actions. Furthermore, the speaker utilizes direct evidence, specifically by presenting an audio clip concerning the Town Hall Square incident.

The style is formal and analytical, particularly in the technical presentation of the draft bill, where logical argumentation is employed. Simultaneously, the speaker adopts a procedurally corrective role, intervening to ensure order in the chamber and attempting to define the extreme language ("abuse") utilized within parliament. Ultimately, the tone is persuasive and appealing, requesting support for the bill.

The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, accusatory, and emotional, employing strong comparisons (e.g., the Soviet era) and rhetorical questions ("Do you even have any sense in your head?"). The speaker stresses the government's dishonesty and incompetence, relying on public outrage and quoting satirical remarks about the prime minister.

The speaker’s style is combative and forceful, utilizing strong emotional appeals regarding injustice, especially on the topic of closing rural schools and the squandering of resources. They employ sharp metaphors and harsh judgments, labeling the activities of the Ministry of Climate as "humbajumba" (mumbo-jumbo) and referring to its personnel as "voodoo specialists." The speaker sharply contrasts education with large-scale national projects, emphasizing the crucial importance of preserving Estonian identity and security.