By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

Rhetoric is critical and fact-based, yet it also employs questions and appeals to capture attention. The tone is formal, but the style is incisive, focusing on highlighting legal and social implications.

The speech is argumentative and direct, employing both emotional and logical arguments. The text highlights the gravity of the problem by posing it as questions, and uses examples (sugar tax, school lunch, VAT on vegetables) to illustrate the futility of superficial solutions. The example of the "Excel spreadsheet" also contains a touch of wit and irony, lending a critical tone to the piece.

The emphasis is on a formal, respectful tone and a constructive, collaborative approach. It utilizes clear, fact-based points and cuts through with questions aimed at gaining clarity regarding needs and solutions. The statements are characterized by long sentences, but they are purposeful and forward-looking.

The tone is formal and dedicated to logical argumentation; it focuses on constitutional and human rights references, uses citations to sources, and raises questions. Emotions are measured, but moral and ethical reflection provides a strong framework for the discourse. The statements combine facts, references to the Chancellor of Justice, and convention citations, lending the style credibility and persuasive scope.

The speech is combative and emotional, often employing rhetorical questions and personal social references (such as large families or single parents). It features both forceful criticism and the strong use of demagogic humor (e.g., the Audi 80 reference); while formally melodramatic and structured around facts, the primary emphasis remains on persuasive argumentation.

A critical and combative tone is employed, using questions and examples to highlight shortcomings in the government's actions. It combines emotional arguments (social harm, impact on families) with logical points (taxes, the effect of tax changes). The text utilizes procedural references regarding the organization of information sessions and challenges the presented facts and data.

The style is markedly combative and emotional, utilizing rhetorical questions and strong generalizations. It includes narrative references to sports and family life, using personal and emotional elements to make the topic personally and socially relevant. When establishing more complex arguments, it combines them with rational knowledge, but the overall tone remains critical and resentful toward the government.