By Plenary Sessions: Raimond Kaljulaid

The style is formal and critical, yet courteous, addressing the minister respectfully while posing questions. It employs logical appeals, drawing on lessons learned from previous crises (the coronavirus) and the experiences of ordinary citizens. The emotional appeal centers on the potential loss of trust among Defence League members who contribute significantly to national defense. Concrete examples (Rõngu Mahla, cloudberry jam) are utilized to illustrate the arguments.

The style is provocative and ironic, intervening in the debate to prevent it from turning "stupid." The speaker employs rhetorical exaggeration and sarcasm (referencing "transgender admirals") and positions themselves as morally superior, speaking on behalf of "reasonable people."

The style is sharp, accusatory, and forceful, focusing on the "unacceptable" delays by the Ministry of Defense. Sports metaphors are employed (yellow and red cards), and specific timeframes (six months, 133 days, a year and a half) are repeatedly stressed to underscore the critical nature of the situation. The objective is to secure the minister's dismissal through emotional appeal.

The tone is predominantly critical and demanding, especially concerning the government's reforms, where accusatory language is employed ("in the interests of sponsors"). In his argumentation, he relies both on research and facts (results of platform work) and on emotional appeal (the indignation of Hiiumaa residents). The style is formal, yet it includes personal examples (two homes, staying on Hiiumaa) used to test ideas on the minister.