By Plenary Sessions: Helmen Kütt

The rhetorical style is serious and forceful, employing strong emotional terms such as "catastrophe" and "mass slaughter." The speaker poses direct questions demanding accountability, emphasizing both the government's political failure and the mental health needs of the employees.

The tone is predominantly serious, concerned, and urgent, especially when describing the crisis in the social sector, where emotional appeals are used (worry and suffering are at their breaking point). When addressing the government, the style is direct and demanding, focusing on highlighting risks and negative consequences while requiring honesty and transparency. The speaker uses both data (special care funding percentages) and references to public actions (the rally on September 25th).

The style is polite and respectful, addressing both the Chair and the President of the Bank of Estonia with deference. The speaker employs both acknowledgement (for highlighting the topic of cash) and a direct political line of questioning, while simultaneously recognizing the sensitivity and inappropriateness of the question.

The style of address is extremely polite, respectful, and appreciative, especially towards the Chancellor of Justice ("a big thank you to you... for explaining matters with such a kind and friendly disposition"). The tone is balanced, praising the excellent work of most employees, but simultaneously emphasizing the need to identify and resolve the "occasional isolated flaws" (literally: drops of tar).

The style is formal and respectful ("esteemed chairman," "respected Minister of Social Affairs"), but simultaneously very persistent and demanding, given that the question regarding budget priorities in the social sector is reiterated multiple times. The emphasis lies on logical and political argumentation, seeking specific points (one, two, or three topics).

The style is formal, respectfully addressing the presiding officer and the minister, yet simultaneously concerned and urgent. Emotional appeals are utilized, describing the immense pain and fear people feel regarding the closure of services. The speaker presents direct and concrete demands (e.g., "one-two-three steps"), balancing emotion with political pressure.

The rhetorical style is urgent and critical, emphasizing human suffering and the severity of the situation facing those in need. Both logical arguments (data, the length of waiting lists) and emotional appeals are employed, referencing the demonstration on Toompea and the issue of wage poverty. The government's inaction is sharply criticized, with accusations that it is merely engaging in election campaigning.