By Plenary Sessions: Tõnis Lukas

The rhetorical style is analytical, critical, and concerned, warning that the current steps will remain a "deceptive joy" unless a general wage increase occurs. The speaker uses a structured approach, dividing the topics into clear problems (e.g., the basis of the differentiation fund, the motivation of local governments) and poses repetitive questions to the minister, focusing on formal legal shortcomings.

The rhetorical style is sharply attacking and insistent, repeatedly emphasizing the lack of trust in the government. The speaker uses both logical arguments (strategic lack of foresight, the Swedish example) and emotional appeal (the citizens' sense of security, Tartu's reputation). The tone is formal, addressing the Chairman, the Minister, and members of the Riigikogu (Parliament), and emphasizes that the remaining time is "wasted time" for Estonia.

The style is formal, analytical, and thoroughly explanatory, focusing on justifying legislative details and historical necessity. The speaker employs logical arguments, presenting the law chapter by chapter, but also includes emotional warnings (for example, the necessity of protecting the Song Festival Grounds as a national sanctuary from real estate development). He/She is appreciative of the contributors and the cooperation involved.

The style is formal, but includes an ironic and provocative introduction aimed at the Prime Minister and the Reform Party. The speaker starts with personalized sarcasm, but then transitions to a logically structured and analytical policy issue. The tone is critical of the government's strategic solutions.

The rhetorical style is serious, strategic, and includes strong emotional appeals regarding the avoidance of civilian casualties ("too horrible"). The speaker employs logical arguments (cost-effectiveness, tactical necessity) and references historical context (the 2004 speech) to affirm the enduring relevance of their points. The tone is defensive and cautionary, emphasizing the danger inherent in ignoring real threats.

The speaker's style is formal, direct, and critical, utilizing logical arguments and data to highlight the government's inaction. The tone is concerned and urgent, particularly regarding the diminishing status of the Estonian language, warning against the formation of "bubbles" and the pressure for other languages to become the state language. He/She poses sharp follow-up questions to the ministers, demanding specific figures and timelines.

The rhetorical style is analytical and concerned, posing a formal question to the minister. The appeal is logical, focusing on practical consequences such as financial waste and inefficiency resulting from arbitrary decisions.

The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and critical, emphasizing the necessity of detailed planning and clear agreements. The appeals are primarily logical, relying on political facts and historical context, but they also include strong emotional value judgments concerning the Estonian language and a national sense of inferiority. The speaker remains persistent in the debate, repeatedly requesting additional time for a comprehensive treatment of the subjects.