By Plenary Sessions: Riina Solman

The rhetorical style is sharply critical and urgent, emphasizing the gravity of the demographic situation and the detrimental nature of the government's actions. Both emotional accusations (such as breaking promises, arrogance, and injustice) and statistical data are employed to support the arguments. The tone is formal yet direct, addressing the minister with pointed, accusatory criticism.

The rhetorical style is confrontational and accusatory, beginning with a direct correction of the Minister of the Interior's earlier positions. Logical arguments are employed, based on the analysis of survey data, contrasting these findings with accusations of political opportunism ("in the name of chasing votes").

The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and concerned, emphasizing the seriousness of the problem. Logical appeals are employed, relying on statistical data (the proportion of immigrants) and comparisons with other countries (Latvia, Sweden/Malmö). The address is presented in the form of questions directed to the presenter, seeking factual and procedural clarification.

The rhetorical style is sharply accusatory and combative, employing specific examples and anecdotes detailing the failures and unethical conduct of Eesti 200. Strong language is utilized, including terms like "hijack," "malicious trademark theft," and "swindling." The speaker primarily frames their criticism through rhetorical questions, aiming to underscore the opposing party's shortcomings and lack of ethics.

The speaker's style is direct, critical, and occasionally confrontational, employing strong judgments such as "hypocritical" and "a masterclass in demagoguery." They combine logical arguments (the substitution effect, lack of inclusion) with emotional and value-based appeals, defending the "delicate feelings" of believers and religious freedom. Rhetorical questions are used to underscore the opposing side's lack of comprehension and incompetence.