By Plenary Sessions: Rene Kokk

The style of address is formal and critical, utilizing salutations such as "Good Vice-Chairman" and "Honored Rapporteur." The tone is demanding and conveys a certain urgency regarding national preparedness and procedural injustice. The emphasis is placed on logical appeals and the demand for procedural fairness, referring to the government's actions as "political bickering."

The rhetorical style is formal and parliamentary in nature, utilizing addresses directed at the Deputy Speaker, the Minister, and the Members of Parliament. The tone is critical and demanding when the fate of the opposition's draft legislation is discussed, with the government being accused of stalling the process. When the bill is introduced, the style is brief, direct, and appeals for support.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and urgent, emphasizing the gravity of the situation ("the situation is very bad"). Logical arguments are employed (lack of cost-effectiveness, issues with land acquisition) alongside rhetorical devices, such as the description of the three stages of truth denial. The minister is addressed directly, demanding substantive answers and challenging the minister's assertions (for example, the principle of wealth concerning the car tax).

The rhetorical style is formal and substantive when introducing draft legislation, but it becomes sharp and ironic during the question-and-answer session. Historical comparisons (the Savisaar era) are employed to criticize ambiguous communication. The appeals are primarily logical, focusing on the economic situation and procedural correctness.

The rhetorical style is demanding, critical, and at times confrontational, especially when dealing with topics that touch upon national dignity and the injustice of the legal system. Strong emotional appeals and rhetorical questions are employed, such as, "How long will this groveling last?" and "How exactly are we going to break through this?" The speaker is straightforward and favors value-based assessments.

The tone is critical, anxious, and urgent, employing strong emotional expressions, such as "the harassment and humiliation of families must stop." The speaker uses rhetoric that calls for collective action and the search for solutions, balancing the emotional appeal with political criticism.

The rhetorical style is direct and question-focused, beginning with a polite address to the Vice-Chairman. The tone is critical and probing, utilizing historical context (the 2009 VAT increase) to cast doubt on the long-term intentions and trustworthiness of the opposing party.

The rhetorical style is confrontational and demanding, presenting direct questions to the minister and requiring that research be cited to justify political decisions. Strongly critical and judgmental language is used when describing the government's policy, calling it the "green transition madness" and claiming that it is "failing." The appeals are primarily logical, focusing on the economic consequences.