By Plenary Sessions: Mart Helme

The tone is extremely combative, accusatory, and overwrought, utilizing strong metaphors such as "chaos," "light years away," and "bare water." The speaker employs both logical arguments (fixing costs and revenues in energy projects) and emotional appeals (the necessity of assisting Estonian teachers and rescue workers). Personal attacks are used (making reference to the surname of Finance Minister Mart Võrklaev), and the coalition is accused of cynical deception, while the opposition is accused of presenting a fait accompli.

The speaker's style is extremely combative, accusatory, and confrontational, employing strong emotional appeals and personal attacks (e.g., "your stupidity is still surprising"). Both procedural arguments (a protest against the chair's arbitrary actions) and legal arguments are utilized, referencing the Vienna Convention. The tone is predominantly condemnatory and critical, accusing the opposing side of destroying parliamentarism and riding roughshod over the rules.

The tone of the discourse is highly combative, emotional, and accusatory, focusing primarily on moral appeals and the perceived lack of empathy. Dramatic language ("epidemic," "shameful") and rhetorical questions are employed to highlight the minister's and officials' apparent ignorance and their avoidance of responsibility. The minister's replies are dismissed as "bureaucrat talk."

The style is highly confrontational and accusatory, employing emotional and extreme labeling ("criminal organization"). The speaker frames their position as a procedural motion, but the appeal itself is emotional and personal, rather than logical or evidence-based.

The rhetorical style is confrontational, skeptical, and ironic, accusing the opposing side of engaging in "brainwashing." The speaker uses a personal story (a former ambassador in Moscow) and rhetorical questions to cast doubt on the logic and justification of the opponent's arguments. The tone is direct and emotionally charged, focusing on anecdotes rather than data.

The style of discourse is formal and legalistic, employing terminology such as "for the sake of the protocol" and "subject to denunciation." The tone is sharply critical and combative, focusing on procedural violations and including a direct warning regarding the future annulment of the draft legislation. The appeal is primarily logical and procedural, emphasizing the requirement for legality.

The rhetorical style is sharply critical, sarcastic, and combative, utilizing emotional expressions (e.g., "wasted money") and proverbs ("God gives the office, He also gives the sense"). The speaker employs irony to emphasize the minister's lack of accountability and the failure of the e-exam system, posing questions that suggest deep distrust regarding the government's motives.