By Plenary Sessions: Aivar Kokk

An emotional and combative style, often employing rhetorical questions and direct accusations. It combines fact-based arguments with personal anecdotes and historical references. The style utilizes colloquial language ("pals," "for God's sake") and metaphors ("got off on the wrong foot," "the real issue is buried somewhere else entirely").

The speaker employs a fact-based and systematic approach, presenting specific figures and dates to support their arguments. Their tone is critical, yet courteous, utilizing the formal address "Honorable Prime Minister" and "Honorable Minister." They structure their speeches logically, moving from one topic to the next with clear transitions.

He employs emotional and confrontational rhetoric, labeling the government's actions as "a mess" and "utter nonsense." He relies heavily on specific figures and examples, combining factual analysis with personal experience (e.g., the drive from Tartu to Tallinn). He uses vivid comparisons and metaphors ("the opposition is being steamrolled"), and often concludes his speeches with a call for a more serious discussion.

Adopting a fact-based and direct approach, the speaker relies on concrete figures and examples. The style is critical yet constructive, consistently offering alternative solutions. They employ rhetorical questions and personal experiences (specifically referencing a prior conversation with the Climate Minister) to underscore their viewpoints.

The tone is sharp and confrontational, employing emotionally charged phrases such as "stupid bills" and personal attacks. The rhetoric is populist, focusing on the struggles of ordinary people and families. Irony and sarcasm are used, particularly when referencing competitors' promises and ratings. The argumentation blends emotional appeals with concrete numerical examples.

The speaking style is direct and question-driven, employing a practical approach when clarifying complex subjects. The speaker utilizes specific examples and figures to back up their arguments, maintaining courtesy ("Thank you, esteemed Chair!"), yet simultaneously posing pointed questions. The style is fact-based rather than emotional, focusing primarily on resolving practical issues.