By Plenary Sessions: Anti Allas

The rhetorical style is formal, but the tone is urgent and at times critical, expressing frustration with the government’s inaction in resolving crises. It employs both logical arguments (the necessity of wage subsidies and insurance) and emotional appeals (the bankruptcy of business owners). The issue of fast internet is directly referred to as a "farce," which sharpens the criticism.

The rhetorical style is insistent and confrontational, utilizing strong logical contrasts (a critical concern versus a 100 million gift). The speaker poses sharp rhetorical questions to the Prime Minister ("How is this logical?") to underscore the illogical nature and social danger of the situation.

The style is frequently critical and emotionally charged, particularly when addressing economic injustice (a topic that "makes the soul sick"), often employing stark contrasts (e.g., front-line workers versus those earning over 4,000 euros). However, the speaker is also capable of adopting a personal and warm tone, speaking in their native language (Võro) and referencing the concerns of ordinary residents in their constituency.

The rhetorical style is supportive and recognizing concerning social measures, but immediately becomes analytical and demanding when the question of funding is addressed. Both emotional appeal (a reference to mothers in the home region) and specific calculations and fiscal logic are utilized to emphasize budgetary responsibility.

The style is initially very respectful and appreciative towards the Chancellor of Justice ("thank you very much for the very good work"). It then becomes critical and emotional, using strong wording ("violence") to describe the situation of small forest owners. The speaker emphasizes that the political decisions are incomprehensible both to those present in the hall and to ordinary people.

The speaker's style is critical, passionate, and insistent, especially when addressing regional policy topics, using emotional expressions ("it hurts very, very much," "it makes [me] very, very sad"). The emphasis rests equally on logical argumentation (the lack of effectiveness) and rhetorical questions, which are used to call into question the minister's actions and ability to coordinate.

The style is formal and respectful toward the presenter, beginning with an expression of gratitude and praise for the organization's work. The speaker adopts a concerned and problem-focused tone, highlighting the magnitude of the issue ("extremely large") and offering a concrete political proposal as a solution.

The rhetorical style is formal, yet insistent and demanding, especially regarding healthcare issues. It employs both emotional appeals (referencing a child left without aid and the growing societal divide) and political and regional arguments (such as the geopolitical situation and fair competition). The style is primarily interrogative and demands clarification.

The rhetorical style is direct and interrogative, involving a slight confrontation with the Minister concerning past disagreements and the Minister's critical stance. The speaker uses personal validation (a reference to a court ruling that confirmed their earlier assertions) and concludes with a specific, data-driven request for information.

The rhetorical style is formal and respectful (e.g., "Honorable Minister!"), yet simultaneously concerned and questioning, focusing on the genuine worries of the Estonian people. The speaker uses emotional and logical appeals in a balanced way, citing, for instance, a personal experience involving sending letters from the town of Võru to illustrate the digital divide.

The rhetorical style is formal, businesslike, and exacting, making it suitable for submitting official inquiries or interpellations. Logical appeals are employed, referencing both legal statutes (such as the Chancellor of Justice's letter) and economic ramifications (including losses incurred by forest owners or the costs associated with a child's education). When addressing crises (like the swine fever epidemic), the tone becomes insistent, stressing the necessity of immediate and clear decisions to prevent the erosion of production potential.