By Plenary Sessions: Tanel Kiik

The speaker employs combative and accusatory rhetoric, especially directed at the Reform Party, accusing them of hypocrisy and populism. Emotional appeals ("every child counts," "the suffering of innocent people") are interwoven with specific numerical data (the subsistence level rising from 200 euros to 250 euros, a cost of 6 million euros). The tone is critical and persistent, repeatedly utilizing rhetorical questions to undermine the opponents' standpoints.

The speaker employs sharply confrontational rhetoric, sequentially posing three precise questions to the Prime Minister and accusing the Reform Party of altering its stance without providing public justification. The rhetoric is logical and fact-based, drawing upon concrete examples (Kaja Kallas, Liisa-Ly Pakosta) and mathematical arguments concerning the parliamentary vote arithmetic. The delivery is formal, yet clearly critical in its focus, utilizing rhetorical techniques designed to cast doubt on the opponent's competence.

The speaker consistently employs confrontational and critical rhetoric, highlighting the government's communication issues and lack of transparency. Emotional appeals (such as the phrase "desperately lacking empathy") are intermingled with fact-based accusations, establishing an intense and condemnatory tone. The speaker also demonstrates irony and sarcasm, particularly in the second speech, where they point out the incoherence of the minister's response regarding historical parallels.

Consistently maintains a critical and accusatory tone, particularly when addressing the Competition Act and the Pihlakodu case. Highlights contradictions between the government's rhetoric and its actual actions. Maintains a fact-based approach, but employs strong emotional appeals.

They employ sharp and direct criticism, accusing the government of contradictory behavior. Specific examples and statistics are cited to support their arguments. The piece concludes with a rhetorical question that underscores the government's inconsistency.

Employs a humorous and occasionally ironic tone when discussing the "two Reform Parties." It blends light sarcasm with serious political issues. It maintains an approach that is friendly yet critical, concluding with a constructive suggestion.

It employs a fact-based, yet critical approach, highlighting specific examples from previous decisions. It appeals to the sense of justice, emphasizing the needs of underprivileged individuals. It maintains a constructive tone, offering concrete solutions.