By Plenary Sessions: Jaak Valge

The speech is extremely brief, formal, and direct, utilizing polite forms of address ("Dear Chairman," "Dear colleagues"). The style is focused on quickly introducing the draft's objective, being informative rather than emotional.

The rhetorical style is formal, analytical, and heavily data-driven, relying on logical arguments and statistical comparisons. The tone is critical and concerned, particularly regarding systemic errors and ideological bias within the scientific community. The focus on details ("The devil often lies in the details") and the citation of authoritative sources lend the discourse a distinctive academic-critical tone.

The rhetorical style is formal and aims for constructiveness ("to contribute constructively"), yet its content is sharply critical and demanding. The speaker employs logical appeals, relying on comparative data and posing direct questions regarding the lack of analysis. The tone is official, addressing the esteemed Chairman and Minister.

The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, utilizing addresses to the Chairman and the Minister. The first speech is analytical and interrogative, focusing on logical data and demanding statistical correlations. The second speech is brief and explanatory, emphasizing the clear and rational motive behind the economic measure.

The rhetorical style is ideological, forceful, and direct, framing the issue of the monument as a matter of national security and identity. Strong emotional terms are employed ("barbarically razed," "a mockery"), and questions are answered confidently, sometimes ironically, while savoring the "sincere questions."

The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, direct, and critical, casting doubt on the objectivity of government data. Both logical arguments and direct accusations are employed, such as calling the minister a politically correct leftist politician who refuses to link the increase in crime to mass migration.

The rhetorical style is analytical and critical, emphasizing the speaker’s own rationality in contrast to the government’s alleged irrationality. The form of a question is employed to expose the ideological motive underpinning the opposition’s inaction. The tone is formal and accusatory, focusing on logical appeal and the debunking of standard arguments.

The style is formal, but the tone is cautionary and urgent, highlighting the severity of the economic crisis. The speaker employs logical argumentation, drawing upon historical narrative and a chain of causal connections to illustrate the repercussions of poor political decisions. Admonitory language is used, stating that only a fool fails to learn from their mistakes.

The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, conveying moderate skepticism toward the information presented by the ministers ("I dare to harbor a little doubt"). The speaker employs logical appeals, demanding specific research findings, standard formulas, and models to underpin the decisions. He often starts with praise ("very commendable") before pivoting to a sharp counter-question.