By Plenary Sessions: Anastassia Kovalenko-Kõlvart

A competitive, combative, and boastful style. The texts employ strong accusations, emotional language, and rhetorical devices (such as the coalition's "transparent" pragmatic attitude, or "such taxation"). Long paragraphs and concrete examples are used to capture attention and emphasize moral and economic arguments.

The focus is on a critical position, primarily that of the opposition; the ensuing maneuvers are emotional and symbolic, often keeping the defense of democracy and the rule of law as the ultimate prize; this is combined with a strong ethical and mathematical argument.

A style grounded in questions, specific case studies, and sharp criticism. The tone is decidedly critical and sometimes geared toward deep analysis. It utilizes concrete examples and references to bolster credibility and the standpoints of the Chancellor of Justice, combining both emotional and fact-based approaches. The text is lengthy and centered on argumentation, rather than being a narrative story.

The tone is critical and confrontational, employing emotional devices and concrete examples. The presentation utilizes subtle metaphors and rhetorical questions to highlight hypocrisy and the resulting impact on school sports.

The tone is professional, critical, and inquisitive; it uses specific references to documents and poses questions designed to uncover deficiencies.

The tone emphasizes conflict and is emotionally strong, utilizing rhetorical questions and inflammatory language characterized by powerful statements (e.g., “towards a punitive state,” “parallel proceedings”). It establishes a strong moral and rule-of-law perspective, employing descriptions to occasionally criticize the coalition and emphasize the threat to citizens' rights. It incorporates some directives and linguistic force.

The tone is combative and accusatory; it employs rhetorical questions, emotional imagery, and specific examples (an Excel spreadsheet, 22% interest rates). The texts exhibit a noticeable critical tone, focusing on risks and the escalation of budgetary costs.

The emphasis is decidedly critical and direct; it uses concrete examples and questions to draw attention to the necessity of impact assessments and transitions. The linguistic style is formal yet critical, focusing on practical problems and their implications.

The rhetoric is largely emotional and delivered in an austere tone, yet it remains argumentative and narrative-driven. The speaker employs rhetorical questions, personal anecdotes (including references to a large family and personal background), strong criticism, and emphasizes "double standards," responsibility, and legal validity. The overall style is confrontational, but it also incorporates elements of recollection and value-based defense.

The focus is on direct accusation and making demands, utilizing emotional and interrogative language (rhetorical questions). This is accompanied by references to broken promises and comparisons with political opponents (e.g., a reference to Kaja Kallas), which heightens the critical tone. The overall style of the text is confrontational, but it includes clear, fact-based references.

An unfiltered tone, inclined toward conflict and accusations; it employs rhetorical questions and sarcasm (e.g., regarding the solar tax) while emphasizing the presentation of facts and arguments; the style is direct and provocative.

The speaker uses an aggressive, formal, and emotional tone, employing a rapid-fire avalanche of claims, powerful rhetorical questions, and symbolic references (such as “the last moment” or “infringement of fundamental rights”). This paints a picture of necessary urgency and a deep moral conviction to protect vulnerable groups.

The tone is assertive, aggressive, and interrogative. It frequently employs rhetorical questions, accusations, and examples to highlight contradictions with the coalition's stance. The content maintains a balance between factual information and emotional moral emphasis. While the form is official, the complex sentence structures and long, argumentative paragraphs result in a powerful argument.