By Plenary Sessions: Evelin Poolamets

The rhetorical style is combative, critical, and insistent, employing strong emotional appeals (the sacrifice of domestic peace, the destruction of the living environment). Sharp and accusatory language is utilized ("green madness," "the developers' law," "green transition fanatics"), and citizens' concerns are pitted against the haste of the state and developers. The appeals are a blend of legal and technical argumentation and personal experience (the impact on farmhouses).

The style is formal and question-driven, utilizing respectful forms of address (Esteemed Chairman of the Session, Good Minister). The speaker poses direct, detailed questions, focusing on the logical acquisition of information and the clarification of concrete plans. The tone is neutral and businesslike.

The rhetorical style is direct, challenging, and extremely serious, focusing on social injustice and violence. Logical argumentation is employed, citing specific facts and journalistic sources, to pressure the minister into acknowledging responsibility. The tone is accusatory and demands a clear answer regarding the scope of responsibility for care homes.

The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, critical, and forceful, especially directed at the Reform Party, which is accused of giving reality-denying answers. The speaker employs both emotional appeals (the price of sovereignty) and logical argumentation, drawing on Defense Forces experts and facts. Rhetorical questions are utilized ("Are we dumber than Sweden?") and the acute nature of the threat on the eastern border is emphasized.

The tone is critical, concerned, and urgent, employing strong emotional and moral appeals (e.g., "greenwashing," "wild west," "they are plundering a great deal"). The style is formal, but includes sharp accusations directed at the government and developers, emphasizing the necessity of justice and equal treatment. It utilizes both technical data (heights, power outputs) and narratives concerning quality of life and health.

The style is predominantly confrontational, critical, and emotionally charged, especially when discussing social tragedies, employing phrases such as "systemic failure" and "moral failure." He/She uses powerful rhetorical questions and emphasizes the violation of the principles of the rule of law. The minister's responses are considered insufficient and indicative of a lack of understanding of the situation.