By Plenary Sessions: Jaak Valge

The style is analytical, rigorous, and critical, offering the minister three concrete recommendations. The address is logic-driven and relies heavily on data and methodological standards, but also includes sharp ideological accusations directed at the government (e.g., "ideological haze," "disastrous immigration policy"). It begins with formal courtesy, which is then replaced by substantive sharpness.

The style is direct and demanding, posing a sharp question to the minister regarding the taking of concrete steps. The tone is suspicious and concerned, emphasizing a strong doubt about the fabrication of a crime. The appeal is primarily logical and ethics-based, focusing on the avoidance of retaliation.

The tone is urgent, sharply critical, and at times confrontational, particularly concerning the government and the committee chairman. It employs strong emotional judgments ("catastrophically low," "empty talk, hypocrisy") and extensively supports these claims with statistical data and academic references. The style is direct, aiming to highlight the opposing side's incompetence and lack of political will.

The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, beginning with an extended historical narrative (the 1934 coup d'état) to underscore the topic's relevance. The tone is passionate and critical of the governing coalition, balancing logical arguments (thresholds, international experience) with repeated emphasis on the democratic maturity of the people. He/She uses quotes (Jüri Raidla) and rhetorical questions to highlight the politicians' distrust of the populace.

The speech is combative, critical, and urgent in tone, emphasizing the seriousness of the demographic situation. The style is logical and data-driven, drawing a historical comparison to the end of the Soviet era to highlight the worsening of the current situation. The speaker offers direct and repeated factual corrections to the prime minister’s assertions, thereby calling into question the competence of his advisors.