By Plenary Sessions: Arvo Aller

The rhetorical style is confrontational and ironic, especially regarding the arguments put forth by the social democrats, which are deemed ridiculous and fear-mongering. Emotional and colorful expressions are employed ("hodgepodge," "peculiar impression") to underscore their position. The appeal is primarily logical, stressing the central government's need for a clear partner at the local level.

The rhetorical style is factual but insistent, emphasizing the need for swift action to alleviate the hardships faced by the public and farmers. It utilizes both logical arguments (stimulating consumption, stable revenue collection) and emotional appeals (people’s standard of living has deteriorated, people must be fed), all while maintaining a high level of formality. Comparisons are also drawn to the positive effects of previous tax reductions (excise duties).

The style is direct, interrogative, and occasionally features light irony, such as the suggestion to hand the minister a pen for taking notes. The speaker employs an emotional appeal, referring to rescuers and police officers as "our eyes" and "ears," thereby stressing the priority of internal security. Emphasis is placed on logical argumentation and fact-checking (specifically regarding Zelenskyy's claims).

The style is formal, respectful, and inquisitive, beginning with the acknowledgment of the presenter's activities ("very important and necessary"). The speaker employs logical argumentation, focusing on a specific financial sum and clarifying its meaning (whether it concerns supporting Ukraine or the export of Estonian e-governance).

The rhetorical style is formal and substantive, beginning with praise for the presenter ("A very relevant and highly insightful overview"). The speaker uses logical arguments concerning the relationship between the tax burden and consumption, and presents their political solution (lowering the value-added tax) in the form of a question.

The style starts off light and humorous, noting that insects are causing a stir in the hall, but it quickly shifts to being formal, logical, and analytical. The speaker employs rhetorical questions to challenge procedural inconsistencies (like the mention of lawsuits) and relies on laws and official documents to substantiate their arguments. Ultimately, the tone is persuasive and aimed at securing the support of the delegates.

The speaker adopts a formal, inquiry-oriented style, utilizing standard forms of address when engaging the presiding officer and the rapporteur. Emphasis is placed on clarifying facts and procedural details, particularly regarding the NGO’s activities and the voting results. The tone is businesslike and centered on achieving logical clarity.

The rhetorical style is critical, direct, and forceful, employing strongly negative terms such as "green madness" and "green frenzy." The speaker poses sharp questions to the prime minister and urges the government to realize that shutting down production in Estonia "will not save the world." The appeal is a blend of economic logic (lack of sustainability) and emotional pressure (the sentiments of the farmers).

The rhetorical style is formal, pragmatic, and interrogative, respectfully addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the Prime Minister. The speaker poses direct questions aimed at clarifying specific data and political plans (e.g., lists of the unemployed, RES plans). A logical and fact-based approach dominates over emotionality, relying on the speaker's personal previous experience.