By Plenary Sessions: Tiit Maran

The rhetorical style is analytical, concerned, and accusatory, emphasizing a systemic problem ("something is fundamentally wrong there"). The speaker employs logical argumentation and rhetorical questions to underscore the broader implications of the issue and demand inter-ministerial communication, all while maintaining a formal and professional tone.

The rhetorical style is analytical, critical, and concerned, emphasizing the shortcomings and crudeness of the draft bill. It utilizes logical arguments and data-driven criticism, referencing the deficiencies in the explanatory memorandum and the composition of the ministry's expert panel. The tone is formal and focuses on substantive and procedural policy critique.

The rhetorical style is formal and questioning, beginning with polite thanks and recognition directed at the Prime Minister (a reference to Vladimir Svet). The speaker poses detailed, policy-focused questions, maintaining an analytical and balanced tone, and emphasizing both speed and procedural correctness.

The style is analytical, detailed, and incisive, emphasizing the severity of the climate crisis and the government's inaction. It employs logical arguments and a detailed historical timeline to illustrate the government's failure to uphold its promises. To sharpen the critique, a humorous yet pointed analogy of a project management failure scheme is utilized: (Enthusiasm, Confusion, Search for Scapegoats, Forgetting).

The rhetorical style is inquisitive and confrontational, heavily employing rhetorical questions to challenge the opposing side's analysis and lack of conviction. The speaker highlights a logical inconsistency ("strange contradiction") and appeals to international comparisons in order to criticize the opposition.

The rhetorical style is formal and interrogative, addressing the minister directly ("Dear Minister!"). Logical argumentation is employed, contrasting information obtained from the media with the minister's claims to highlight the discrepancy and demand clarification. The tone is skeptical and demands clarity in the implementation of policy.