By Plenary Sessions: Katrin Kuusemäe

The style is confrontational and accusatory, employing strong and negative language (e.g., "the crippled tax system") to describe previous policy. A rhetorical question is posed to the minister to affirm their stance and refute the opponents' arguments regarding the threat of inflation.

The style is formal, objective, and informative, focusing on the delivery of facts and procedural history. The speaker employs a logical approach, repeatedly relying on the commission's protocol and avoiding personal opinions in order to maintain the presenter's neutrality. He/She repeatedly refuses to answer substantive questions if they exceed the scope of the commission's discussion.

The speaker’s rhetorical style was highly formal, neutral, and procedural, stemming directly from their role as the committee rapporteur. They concentrated on logical and fact-based arguments, presenting specific dates, figures, and voting results, thereby avoiding any emotional appeals. They repeatedly emphasized that their report should not be construed as containing a personal stance regarding the referendum.

The style is formal, neutral, and strictly informative, which is characteristic of a committee rapporteur who presents facts and procedural decisions. He/She employs a logical and fact-based approach, focusing on accurately reporting what transpired in the committee. When responding to questions regarding the brevity of the discussion, he/she explains the situation somewhat defensively, citing the rapporteur's thorough work.

The style of address is highly formal, neutral, and procedural, strictly focusing on the conveyance of events and decisions made during the committee session. Logical appeals are employed, emphasizing the arguments of the Government of the Republic and the committee members while avoiding personal emotional viewpoints. When responding to questions, the speaker strictly limits the scope to what was discussed in the committee, relegating the discussion of personal opinion to the corridor.

The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, focusing on the specifics of policy implementation and the evaluation of performance. The speaker poses a logical follow-up question to gauge the success of the government's stated objective (domestic production) and the specific interest shown by foreign investors.

The style of discourse is formal, neutral, and extremely procedure-centric. It restricts itself to brief summaries of the commission's proceedings, focusing on facts, procedural decisions, and consensus support. The appeals are exclusively logical and informative, avoiding emotional language.

The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, addressing the esteemed Chairman of the Session and the Chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee. The tone is analytical and matter-of-fact, presenting a specific strategic question without emotional appeals.