By Plenary Sessions: Andrei Korobeinik

The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and ironic, employing strong emotional appeals (the plight of pensioners) and sharp metaphors ("demented squirrels hiding nuts"). The speaker criticizes the opposing side both personally and procedurally, demanding that the presenter answer the questions posed, rather than discussing ratings or other irrelevant topics.

The style is sharply critical, confrontational, and deeply concerned, especially regarding the incompetence of the rapporteur and the actions of the governing coalition. Logical and technical arguments are employed to demonstrate the shortcomings of the draft bill and the threats it poses to the rule of law. The rhetoric is focused on emphasizing the role of parliament and the importance of debate, while simultaneously accusing the Reform Party of undermining parliamentary culture.

The rhetorical style is highly combative, accusatory, and ironic, employing strong emotional appeals (lying, injustice toward pensioners). The speaker utilizes literary references (Orwell’s "1984") and historical comparisons (Michal vs Laar, Jufereva-Skuratovski vs Lauristin) to discredit the policies and individuals of their opponents. The tone is generally critical and uncompromising.

The rhetorical style is critical and at times confrontational, including both a slight personal remark (Lauri's sleepy demeanor) and a political attack. Rhetorical questions are used to cast doubt on the presence and competence of the opposing side (SDE). The style is rather emotional and relies on visual examples, not data.

The style is highly combative, critical, and demanding, especially towards the Minister of Finance, who is repeatedly pressed for direct answers. Strong metaphors ("the funeral of the Estonian economy") and references (an Orwell quote) are used to highlight the opponent's dogmatism. The tone is urgent, emphasizing the need to quickly save the economy.