By Plenary Sessions: Mario Kadastik

The rhetorical style is constructive, substantive, and analytical, emphasizing the need for both swift and long-term decisions while criticizing previous indecisiveness. It employs strong logical arguments and temporal forecasts (extending to the year 2100), maintaining a formal tone but also including a brief humorous aside regarding a colleague's comment.

The rhetorical style is highly formal, objective, and informative, focusing on the neutral communication of the committee's work and the content of the draft bill. The speaker employs logical arguments and procedural explanations to justify decisions (e.g., avoiding duplication of effort in the case of EIA [Environmental Impact Assessment]). Emotional appeals are absent; the discourse is focused on the presentation of facts and procedural details.

The style is predominantly businesslike, logical, and explanatory, focusing on facts and procedures (e.g., summaries of committee discussions). It repeatedly uses procedural remarks and clarifications to delineate its scope of responsibility ("Putting a disclaimer first," "this was not discussed in the committee"). The tone is concerned about the climate crisis but pragmatic when it comes to offering solutions.