By Plenary Sessions: Vladimir Arhipov

The speaker uses questioning as a rhetorical device, posing a total of six direct questions to their colleagues. Their style is polite but critical, always starting with, "Thank you, good Chair! Esteemed colleague!" They employ logical arguments and concrete examples, emphasizing the contradictions in the opponents' positions.

Employs emotional and rapid rhetoric directed at criticizing the government. It highlights specific examples from everyday life and uses irony ("Very good answer! Unfortunately, life is a bit different"). The style is direct and confrontational, but focuses on facts and specific problems.

It uses a direct and critical tone, presenting rhetorical questions to the Prime Minister. The style is confrontational rather than conciliatory, utilizing specific examples to support its claims and emphasizing the inconsistencies between the government's promises and actions.

It uses emotional and accusatory rhetoric, characterizing the government's policy as "sad" and an "extortionate tax." Specific examples (talking to entrepreneurs, the pre-strike) are highlighted to support the arguments. The style is direct and confrontational, utilizing questions to pressure the opponent and emphasize one's own viewpoints.

The speaking style is formal and deferential, beginning all addresses with a polite salutation. When discussing foreign missions, the speaker employs emotionally charged and patriotic rhetoric, emphasizing bravery and a sense of duty. The argumentation is logical and structured, but it also includes strong appeals to core values regarding peace and security.

Adopts a straightforward and practical approach, stressing the need for realism ("let's be realistic"). The tone is measured and constructive, focusing on specific issues and solutions. Concerns are expressed factually, without emotional judgment.

It employs a diplomatic and constructive tone, emphasizing cooperation and balance. The speech style has a clearly structured composition, presenting problems and offering solutions. It balances emotional arguments (values, solidarity) with rational arguments (efficiency, practicality). Key terms such as "balance," "efficiency," and "reducing bureaucracy" are used repeatedly.

They employ a direct and interrogative approach, posing specific questions to the ministers. The rhetoric is concerned and demanding, stressing the persistence of the issues and the necessity of practical solutions. It relies on concrete examples and facts, avoiding general assertions.