By Plenary Sessions: Aleksei Jevgrafov

The rhetorical style is formal and respectful ("Honorable Minister!"), but it contains sharp political criticism, employing the metaphor of the minister being "held hostage." The speaker relies on a logical question, connecting the option of partial payment to the necessity of imposing new, large fine rates, and requests the minister's personal opinion.

The rhetorical style is formal ("Honorable Prime Minister"), direct, and challenging, utilizing a simple question format. The speaker emphasizes the simplicity of the question, shifting the focus to the Prime Minister's personal conduct.

The style is formal, logical, and well-reasoned, utilizing both factual data (research findings) and emotional appeal (a specific example of the vicious cycle of renouncing citizenship). The speaker adopts a challenging stance toward the prime minister, demanding substantial arguments and calling into question the very foundations of the government's policy. Following an interruption, the argument was resumed, demonstrating persistence in conveying their viewpoint.

The style is sharply critical and urgent, highlighting the severity of the recession and increasing poverty, contrasting this with the minister's "beautiful numbers" projected for 2035. Logical arguments and factual lists (a list of tax hikes) are employed to demonstrate the negative impact of the government's actions. The piece concludes with an emotional appeal directed at the coalition and a patriotic rallying cry ("Straighten your back, Estonia!").

The style is formal ("Dear Minister!"), direct, and critical, posing a question that demands an immediate administrative solution. The tone is businesslike and focuses on the logical requirement to avoid future errors, emphasizing the teachers' right to timely payment.

The style is analytical, critical, and skeptical, utilizing logical appeals and referencing authoritative sources. The speaker employs an ironic tone, describing political changes as "astonishing metamorphoses." The presentation is formal, focusing on facts and legal arguments, thereby calling into question the sensibility of the draft bill.

The style is formal and critical. While addressing the esteemed Prime Minister, the text employs strong emotional terminology, such as "betrayal of expectations." The speaker utilizes logical and procedural argumentation, accurately detailing the delay's timeline (from January through the end of March) and its negative effect on the recruitment process. The tone is one of concern and demands an assessment of the situation.