By Plenary Sessions: Tõnis Lukas

The style is analytical and, at times, sharp, particularly concerning education issues, where a folksy analogy ("Kört-Pärtli särk") is employed to describe the government's confusion. The speaker presents logical demands with concrete deadlines (May 1st), but also pivots to a political attack, accusing opponents of failing to deliver on their promises. There is also a brief, procedural, and slightly mocking discussion regarding the opponent's presence in the chamber.

The tone is critical, urgent, and cautionary, emphasizing the danger to Estonian society and the future of education if the government fails to act. It employs both logical arguments (the necessity of preventing strikes and ensuring the next generation of professionals) and emotional appeals (at the expense of children's future). The style is formal, referencing laws and procedures, and stresses the need for the government's unified responsibility.

The style is formal, explanatory, and procedural, particularly concerning the main presenter, who provides the rationale for adopting the draft legislation and its historical context. Logical arguments are employed to dispel concerns regarding the creation of loopholes and potential future funding shortfalls. The questioner is direct and focuses on fiscal accountability and procedural oversight mechanisms.