By Plenary Sessions: Anti Allas

The style is predominantly serious and pressing, especially when addressing social and security problems, emphasizing that people "truly cannot manage anymore." It employs both logical arguments (statistics) and emotional appeals, linking the prevention of fraud directly to the credibility of the rule of law. The speaker is straightforward and occasionally confrontational, criticizing populism and the inaction of opponents.

The rhetorical style is direct and question-oriented, addressing the minister directly to seek clarification. The tone is concerned and emphasizes the seriousness of the problem ("a huge problem"), concluding with a specific proposal that originates outside parliamentary circles (from entrepreneurs).

The rhetorical style is critical and accusatory, employing powerful metaphors (such as "deaf and blind") to underscore how obvious the situation is. Although the speaker expresses personal respect for the minister, the questions themselves are sharp, focusing on demanding accountability and raising ethical concerns.

The speaker's style is serious, concerned, and at times sharply confrontational, particularly directed at the ruling parties and other opposition factions. They employ both emotional appeals (referring to food theft and the hardships faced by people) and logical arguments (fiscal balance, revenue generated by progressive income tax). The speeches maintain a formal tone but include direct accusations of lying and populism.

The style is formal, direct, and critical, particularly regarding the minister's oversimplified approach. The speaker employs logical appeals and poses sharp rhetorical questions ("Why are you forgetting this next part?"), demanding comprehensive and prioritized explanations from the opposing party. The tone is one of concern when discussing the functioning of competition rules.

The style is formal, addressing the Prime Minister and colleagues, but the tone is critical and urgent. Both logical arguments (flaws in the tax structure, slowing economic growth) and emotional appeals are utilized, referencing a successful investor's embarrassment over the government's actions. The speaker is direct and accusatory toward the government, criticizing their failure to grasp the structural problem.

The rhetorical style is highly aggressive, confrontational, and accusatory, focusing on exposing the hypocrisy of the opponent (Isamaa/Aivar). The tone is direct, employing rhetorical questions and historical facts to discredit the opponent's arguments, while dismissing the opponent's discourse as "a very beautiful speech, but..." ultimately lacking substance.

The rhetorical style is urgent, critical, and confrontational, accusing the Prime Minister of twisting words and ignoring reality. Both logical arguments (the inefficiency of the tax system) and emotional imagery (leaving people to starve, keeping them in a boat) are employed. The tone is formal yet demanding, emphasizing the necessity for immediate change.

The rhetorical style is formal, yet personally polite, addressing the minister by name ("Dear Kuldar"). The speaker poses straightforward, policy-focused questions, aiming to obtain clear and logical information regarding the differences and changes in support payments. The tone is neutral and fact-based.

The speaker employs a critical and demanding style, focusing heavily on logical and procedural issues, and repeatedly requesting clarification ("Please explain"). Emotional language is also used when criticizing systemic failures (e.g., "it makes my soul sick"), but the overall tone remains formal and analytical.