By Plenary Sessions: Siim Pohlak

The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and accusatory. Strong phrases such as "abuse of power" and "tax hike frenzy" are employed, and the government is accused of making foolish decisions and disregarding entrepreneurs. The speaker repeatedly uses rhetorical questions to demand explicit admission and accountability from the minister.

The style is critical and challenging, employing rhetorical questions to highlight the contradictions in the opponent's arguments ("What is the actual reality of this?"). The speaker relies on logical appeals and examples from a foreign country (Lithuania) to support their economic positions, while simultaneously accusing opponents of generating panic.

The rhetorical style is critical, accusatory, and urgent, emphasizing the seriousness of the situation ("unprecedented situation," "tax chaos"). The appeals are a mix of logical argumentation (demanding impact assessments and referencing studies) and emotional accusation regarding the previous government's "squandering." Formal language is employed (an interpellation to the minister), but the content is strongly confrontational and demands substantive answers.

The rhetorical style is highly combative, critical, and forceful, accusing opponents of "cheap demagoguery" and contempt for intellectual debate. Strong metaphors are employed, such as "the ship of state heading for the reefs" and the finance minister being portrayed as "the ship's captain" who remains unperturbed. The style merges emotional appeal (injustice toward the vulnerable) with specific political accusations (tax hikes, the creation of bureaucracy).

The rhetorical style is highly combative, urgent, and emotionally charged, utilizing strong moral judgments such as "absurd," "outrageous," and "you should be ashamed." Instead of logical arguments, the emphasis is placed on moral responsibility, and the government is threatened with a public backlash. The tone is direct and accusatory.