By Plenary Sessions: Priit Sibul

The style is urgent and demanding, employing strong warnings ("catastrophe") and posing specific procedural questions (when, which ministry, what it covers). The tone is formal and focuses on applying logical pressure to obtain clear answers regarding the legislative timetable.

The style is formal and analytical, using in the introduction a polite, but possibly ironic acknowledgment of the minister's preparation. The speech is structured around logical, concrete questions, citing examples of the inefficient implementation of legal norms (e.g., 75-year restrictions). The appeal is purely logical and policy-based.

The tone is formal and questioning, respectfully directed at both the Vice-Chairman of the Riigikogu and the governing administration. The address itself is analytical, focusing on political specifics and financing matters, and demands concrete data and an action plan from the government.

The style is professional, analytical, and critical, highlighting procedural and legal failures, as well as instances of abuse. Logical arguments are employed, supported by concrete examples (the MTA letter, the National Library proposal, and vaccine procurement). The tone is formal but conveys concern and calls for swift action to ensure transparency.

The rhetorical style is formal and courteous, respectfully addressing both the chairman and the governing authority. The speech is brief and direct, focusing on a logical, procedural framing of the issue, while strictly avoiding emotional appeals.

The style is formal and respectful, addressing the Deputy Speaker of the Riigikogu and the rapporteur. The speaker balances an emotional appeal (stressing that humiliation is too much) with a logical and investigative approach, posing precise questions about the legal root cause of the problem. The tone is analytical and solution-oriented.

The rhetorical style is sharply critical and argumentative, employing rhetorical questions to challenge the government's credibility ("how seriously can we even take this national budget strategy?"). Specific quotes and dates are utilized to underscore the lack of logical consistency, simultaneously injecting emotional color (e.g., "the boys start fooling around"). The tone remains formal, yet it incorporates pointed personal references aimed at the ruler.

The rhetorical style is formal and courteous, incorporating greetings ("A successful New Year") and expressions of gratitude. An analytical approach is employed, with the objective of achieving clarity regarding the content of the draft law, even utilizing the interpretation of body language to justify the question being posed.