By Plenary Sessions: Tõnis Lukas

The style is critical and analytical, focusing on deficiencies in policies and procedures (e.g., drafting a development plan without including culture). Both logical arguments are employed (such as the irreplaceable role of culture in tourism) as well as polite addresses and congratulations (pre-Christmas season, wishing good years), thereby creating a contrast between the pleasant tone and the sharp substantive criticism. The speaker utilizes rhetoric to elicit information when the answers provided are insufficient.

The rhetorical style is initially instructive and persuasive ("I recommend everyone stay in the hall; you will get a little wiser"), later becoming highly critical and emotional, especially when characterizing the opponents' positions. Strong imagery and accusations are used against the Ministry of Education ("towards Black-Hundred, Tsarist-era chauvinism," "twisting the constitution"). The appeal is a mixture of logical, methodical necessity and an emotional defense posture regarding Estonian-speaking children.

The tone regarding security matters is urgent and concerned, emphasizing the necessity of preparations given the backdrop of Russian attacks. Sarcasm and irony are directed at political opponents, referring to the Social Democrats' ideas as a "eureka" moment, and ironically proposing the Seto electoral system as an alternative. The address is formal (directed to the minister) but includes a sharp political interjection.

The tone of the address is critical and logical, focusing on facts and financial analysis, while also employing figurative language. Strong metaphors are utilized, such as "deceiving with wooden eggs" and the reference to young people hiding "behind grandmother's cupboard," intended to underscore the gravity of the situation. The style remains formal, yet it includes sharp accusations directed at ministry officials.