By Plenary Sessions: Lauri Läänemets

The rhetorical style is confrontational and demanding, posing direct questions to the Prime Minister regarding the illogical nature of his policies ("how can you possibly rationalize things like that?"). Logical and economic arguments are employed, but the address concludes with a personal challenge to describe his thought process ("Please describe what is going on in your head.").

The rhetorical style is confrontational and critical, particularly towards the prime minister, who is labeled a failure. The speaker employs logical appeals, citing economic theory, but also incorporates social data (absolute poverty) to underscore the severity of the situation. The tone remains formal yet straightforward, demanding that the minister provide clarification on the rationale behind the tax policy.

The rhetorical style is combative and critical, immediately beginning with the rejection of the opposing side's positions ("We still cannot agree with that"). The speaker employs a logical structure, presenting three clear and structured issues (healthcare, the labor market, security) to support their opposition.

The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and demanding, emphasizing the Prime Minister's reluctance to answer directly ("getting an egg out of a chicken"). A repetitive and clearly defined example of a person earning 1000 euros is used to create both a logical and an emotional appeal. The tone is formal, but includes sharp accusations regarding the government's constant repetition of its political talking points.

The style is argumentative, critical, and highly detailed, employing powerful logical appeals rooted in financial comparisons and the highlighting of injustice. The speaker poses direct questions and challenges, aiming to uncover the rationale behind the government's decisions. While acknowledging the minister's detailed, specialist-level presentation, the speaker criticizes the absence of major, principled solutions.