By Plenary Sessions: Züleyxa Izmailova

The rhetorical style is direct and provocative, employing repeated rhetorical questions ("Don't you trust...?") to cast doubt on the competence of the minister and the ministry. The tone is formal and focuses on logical and procedural criticism, demanding specific answers.

The language is formal and critical, posing a direct question to the minister regarding the justification of the government's decisions. The emphasis is placed on logical and value-based argumentation, connecting the role of the economic council with ensuring societal diversity and justice.

The style is formal and respectful (addressing [them] as "esteemed Speaker of the Riigikogu" and "dear Minister") while simultaneously being demanding. The speaker uses direct control questions, requiring a simple, unambiguous, fact-based answer ("is it no or yes") from the Minister.

The style is formal and critical, addressing the minister directly. The speaker employs a logical appeal, emphasizing the injustice of the state's actions (taxing charity), and concludes with a direct question regarding justice. The tone is rather businesslike and demanding.

The rhetorical style is sharply critical and concerned, employing rhetorical questions to highlight the government's lack of focus ("Doesn't it seem to you...?"). The appeals rely on statistical data and unfavorable comparisons. Strong metaphors are used, such as the fear that "one lost decade will soon become two" in the energy sector.

The rhetorical style is often combative and critical, especially regarding procedural failures and directed at the opposition party (EKRE), using phrases like "disgraceful" and "embarrassing." When addressing social topics (abuse, rape), the tone is urgent and morally charged, demanding accountability from ministers and immediate action. Both emotional appeals (e.g., "horribly abused") and logical demands (e.g., internal control measures) are presented.