By Plenary Sessions: Andres Metsoja

The speaker's rhetorical style is predominantly critical and combative, especially concerning property issues, employing strong emotional terms such as "terror" and "catastrophic approach." However, the speech relies heavily on logical and legal appeals in its argumentation, highlighting unequal treatment, the lack of proportionality, and the absence of impact assessments.

The rhetorical style is critical and analytical, focusing on logical contradictions (such as tax collection versus economic restriction). Sharp rhetorical questions are employed to challenge the consistency of the government's actions. The tone remains formal yet concerned, highlighting economic damage comparable to the total cost of the teachers' salary increase.

The style of discourse is formal and analytical, focusing on logical argumentation and procedural clarity. The tone is inquisitive and neutral, with the objective of obtaining factual confirmation regarding amendments to the planning procedure, while avoiding emotional or personal appeals.

The tone is generally substantive, analytical, and demanding, particularly concerning economic issues where clear plans are necessary. Folk comparisons are also employed (such as the phrase "like sawn timber from Vändra"), and the necessity for swift and decisive action is stressed. The speaker is also procedurally precise, correcting the presiding officer regarding the committee's name.