By Plenary Sessions: Helmen Kütt

The rhetorical style is formal and analytical, centering on logical and legal arguments, often citing specific articles of the constitution. The tone is anxious and urgent, particularly concerning the flawed wording of the legislation and the inadequate limit set for savings. Emotional examples are employed, such as references to "coffin money" (savings for funeral expenses) and the act of gifting piggy banks to children. The speaker aims to persuade the audience of the necessity of correcting both the procedural and substantive errors.

The rhetoric is formal and heavily relies on data and statistics, but the tone is critical and urgent, especially when highlighting inequality. Both logical argumentation (comparison of figures) and emotional warnings (the threat of protests and "screaming devaluation") are employed. The follow-up question is detailed and procedural, focusing on the need for negotiations.

The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, addressing ministers by their titles, but simultaneously using an analytical tone to call the minister's administrative competence into question. Both political criticism (the Ekseko case) and personal context (the "friend of birds" reference) are used to introduce the subjects.

The style is formal and interrogative, focusing on details and procedures. The tone is concerned and demanding, particularly when highlighting the injustice surrounding social issues (special needs care, disability benefits). It employs logical appeals, relying on specific numbers and facts to dispute government claims.

The rhetorical style is critical and insistent, combining logical appeals (audit data, increasing waiting lists) with emotional elements (workers protesting in the street, the burden on family caregivers). The speaker presents direct challenges to the prime minister, demanding solutions regarding the issue of underfunding and drawing comparisons with a previous period.

The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the minister directly. The tone is critically constructive, acknowledging positive steps ("very good," "great"), but emphasizing shortcomings ("late and little"). The speaker uses direct questions and admits the possibility that the missing information might be their own oversight, which adds a measure of restraint to the presentation.

The style is critical, concerned, and straightforward, especially when addressing social issues, utilizing both logical arguments and emotional appeals (e.g., referring to a 91-cent increase as insulting). The speaker maintains a formal tone, addressing the esteemed presiding officer and the minister, but simultaneously raises pointed questions and criticizes the procedural rushing. He/She quotes at length from an interest group's address to emphasize the basis of his/her viewpoints.