By Plenary Sessions: Tõnis Lukas

The rhetorical style is formal and argumentative, emphasizing the public value of debate and the complexity of the subject matter, which is grasped over time. Logical appeals are employed to justify consistency and the necessity of identifying hidden security threats, particularly among stateless persons. The tone is serious and concerned, focusing on the threat to the state.

The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, directly addressing the Prime Minister. The text employs the ironic or descriptive term "car buying festival" to characterize market activity, and the emphasis is placed on logical argumentation and the refinement of forecasts. The overall tone is skeptical concerning the government's ability to deliver on its promises.

The style is formal and respectful, addressing the Chairman and the Rapporteur. The rhetoric is analytical and procedure-focused, centering on the strategic question of the Riigikogu's legislative initiative. The purpose of posing the question is to encourage colleagues to be more active in lawmaking.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and penetrating, employing strong emotional judgments ("Shame!", "neglect") to describe the government's inaction. Logical arguments (wage projections, specific euro amounts) are interwoven with value-based rhetoric, emphasizing the importance of culture and education. It also uses references to well-known individuals (Bernard Shaw) and historical events.

The style is formal, critical, and interrogative, focusing on logical and procedural arguments. Disappointment ("very disappointed") is expressed regarding the topic of vocational schools, along with concern ("disturbing") about the sources of funding. The emphasis is placed on highlighting the credibility of government promises and the absence of official decisions.

The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and questioning, respectfully addressing both the session chair and the presenter. Logical appeals are utilized, focusing on clarifying and defining the consequences of the policy (e.g., medical migration, the economic charges associated with tax exemption). The tone is serious, emphasizing the need to "argue matters seriously" and to avoid ideological digressions.

The speaker's rhetorical style is serious and critical, highlighting the severe impact of government decisions on people's lives. Logical argumentation is employed, focusing on the interconnected negative consequences of the policies. The presentation concludes with a straightforward question aimed at finding a solution.

The rhetorical style is analytical, concerned, and interrogative, highlighting the regional ramifications of political decisions. The speaker employs logical arguments to demonstrate the unintended consequences of the policy (such as the 60% salary fund requirement). The tone is formal and centers on the juxtaposition of policy objectives and actual outcomes, labeling the goal of consolidation as obsolete from the perspective of educational economics.

The style is formal and interrogative, utilizing rhetorical questions concerning the government's achievement of its objectives and the integrity of its policies. While the speaker expresses pathos regarding the ongoing war in Europe, the primary focus remains on logical and political critique. The speaker cites public news sources for their information, maintaining a tone that is analytical and neutrally critical.

The rhetorical style is analytical, critical, and concerned, particularly regarding regional policy, where the situation is deemed "totally out of hand." It employs logical arguments and points to contradictions, such as the tenfold increase in fine rates in a situation where no proceedings have been initiated. The style is formal and focuses on the details concerning the correctness of policy mechanisms and legislation.