By Plenary Sessions: Annely Akkermann

Not enough data

The style is extremely formal, factual, and descriptive, focusing exclusively on the communication of facts and procedural decisions. The speaker employs a logical and neutral tone, avoiding emotional appeals or personal judgments. The discourse is structured in accordance with the commission's reporting requirements, detailing questions, responses, and voting outcomes.

The tone is predominantly formal, substantive, and procedural, especially when presenting the committee's work. When responding to criticism, the tone becomes defensive and mathematically argumentative, emphasizing numerical precision (e.g., the impact of abolishing the tax hump on the median wage). It uses slight irony toward opponents (e.g., Isamaa) and stresses that the committee sessions took place in a constructive atmosphere.

The style is highly formal, procedural, and fact-based, focusing on the content and procedural progress of the draft legislation. The tone is analytical and defensive, particularly when addressing criticism regarding the speed of lawmaking or technical details. It appeals to logic and legal correctness, emphasizing the multi-layered oversight of the legislative process (the ministry, Riigikogu lawyers, and the Chancellor of Justice).