By Plenary Sessions: Peeter Ernits

The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and insistent, utilizing strong emotional expressions and even profanity when describing the government’s attitude ("Shit on the people"). The speaker combines specific technical facts (ornithology) with moral indignation and accusations of corruption. He criticizes the lack of knowledge prevalent in the hall and the format of a party meeting.

The style is critical and blunt, expressing embarrassment over the Riigikogu's (Estonian Parliament's) use of time and employing strong emotional appeals regarding the public's exhaustion. The speaker uses comparisons (Estonia vs. Finland) and contrasts legislative activity with the actual economic situation. They demand that complex topics be explained in "plain language" (or "layman's terms") and include personal assessments of politicians (Kaja Kallas, Kristen).

The rhetorical style is direct and critical, employing both procedural and substantive questions to challenge the appropriateness of the actions taken by the minister and the Cultural Endowment. The speaker emphasizes the significance of the topic ("a crucially important area") and uses a specific, detailed, and emotionally charged example to illustrate their criticism.

The style is formal and interrogative, addressing the manager and the presenter respectfully. Light provocation is used ("strange similarity with Russia") to emphasize the topic of e-elections. The emphasis is on acquiring logical and fact-based information.

The rhetorical style is incisive, interrogative, and skeptical, employing ironic phrases such as "green fever" and "wet dream" to critique past decisions. The speaker poses numerous direct questions, demanding substantive clarification and numerical verification (percentages, plans). Personal and provocative questions (for instance, regarding Kaja Kallas's gender/sex) are also utilized to grab attention.

The rhetorical style is confrontational and accusatory, employing strong emotional terminology such as "enemy" and references to the "occupation regime." The speaker balances this emotional appeal (the exhaustion of the populace) with a logical demand for procedural correctness (impact assessments).

The rhetoric is sharp, suspicious, and confrontational, utilizing emotional expressions such as "the root of all evil" and "baroness." The speaker presents logical counterarguments, citing specific dates, but stresses the narrative of corruption and the redistribution of wealth. He addresses the prime minister personally, urging them to speak clearly, and concludes with an urgent appeal to investigative journalism.

The speaker employs a highly combative and emotional rhetorical style, utilizing strong labels like "stupid decisions," "faulty execution," and "enemies of the people." He balances the logical appeal (the necessity of impact assessments) with an emotional appeal, using an anecdotal story about an entrepreneur to illustrate the policy's detrimental effects. He praises the Chancellor of Justice, referring to his report as "a breath of fresh air."

The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive and highly personal, employing emotionally charged metaphors ("death sentence," "the car tax is your child," "buying an indulgence"). The speaker addresses direct questions to the responsible parties (Mart, Rene) regarding their personal conscience and conduct. The tone is accusatory, centering on the opponents' accountability, and raises the issue of the rise of verbal violence within the country.

The style is sharp, critical, and at times colloquial, using blunt phrases (e.g., "what the management of these stock market firms has got in their pants"). The speaker employs strong emotional appeals, describing the economy as being "stuck in the mud" and accusing the Finance Minister of wasting valuable time. He poses rhetorical questions, calling the wisdom of the action into doubt.

The address is extremely formal, brief, and procedural, fulfilling the requirements for the taking of the oath of office. The tone is serious and respectful, as the speaker addresses colleagues ("Dear colleagues!").