By Plenary Sessions: Madis Kallas

The style of the address is formal and question-oriented, respectfully addressing both the minister and the chair of the session. The tone is analytical and concerned, focusing on the practical consequences of the draft legislation and the details of its implementation, such as the rights concerning salary payments for unqualified teachers.

The style is critical and serious, highlighting injustice and regret (for instance, concerning regional inequality and bureaucracy). The appeals are predominantly logical and political, emphasizing accountability and fairness, although they also incorporate emotional assessments (e.g., "extremely sad to see," "an extremely absurd bureaucratic situation"). Furthermore, the speaker sharply addresses parliamentary procedural matters, criticizing interruptions.

The style is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing both the Chair of the session and the Minister, and offering thanks for the comprehensive responses. The tone is one of concern (expressing sadness over the absence of a solution), yet remains rational. The focus is placed on logical argumentation and the demand for procedural clarifications, rather than emotional appeals.

The speaker's style is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing both the chairperson and the other speaker. The rhetoric is analytical and fact-focused, seeking clear confirmation regarding the foundation of the claims through a logical structure of questioning.

The style is formal and respectful ("Respected Chairman! Dear Prime Minister!"), but at the same time direct and critical. The speaker begins with a factual clarification, defending a former colleague and correcting the Prime Minister's interpretation. This is followed by a logical, policy-focused question, which demands transparency and explanations from the government.

The style is formal, respectful, and questioning, addressing the Chairman and the Minister directly ("Thank you, esteemed Chairman! Good Minister!"). The speaker presents their position by posing a broader question, using logical argumentation to call into question the current unified administrative logic.

The style is formal and question-oriented, addressing the ministers respectfully ("Dear Minister!"). Although most questions are analytical and detail-focused (e.g., the length of transition periods), a strong emotional appeal is also utilized, emphasizing the need to mitigate public disappointment and mentioning the great disappointment felt toward the Estonian state.