By Plenary Sessions: Urmas Reinsalu

The rhetoric is highly aggressive, passionate, and accusatory, emphasizing the government's incompetence, deceit, and lack of transparency. It employs irony and strong negative language ("bungling," "cooks in coats," "fudging the numbers"), and features numerous rhetorical questions. The style blends detailed financial analysis with emotional and urgent appeals to restore order.

The speaking style is combative and extremely persistent, repeatedly and insistently posing the same questions to expose contradictions in the government's responses, particularly regarding the price-lowering or price-raising impact of the Kiisa power plant. The tone is critical and analytical, demanding concrete "answers that involve money" (or "financial specifics"), and employing slight sarcasm when addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu. The appeals are primarily logical and fact-based, emphasizing the importance of figures and forecasts.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and urgent, employing negative and emotional terminology to describe the government's actions ("bungling," "party cronyism," "perfidiousness"). Both logical arguments (figures, draft legislation) and rhetorical devices are utilized, such as proverbs ("A man by his word, an ox by its horn") and references to the transformation from Saul to Paul, all aimed at underscoring the government's unreliability and inaction. The tone is demanding and calls for the government to acknowledge its errors.

The rhetoric is consistent, demanding, and highly data-driven, focusing on logical arguments and statistical facts. The tone is critical and occasionally confrontational (such as the question regarding the laughter directed at the Speaker of the Riigikogu), ultimately expressing bewilderment and disappointment over the sheer lack of substance in the Prime Minister's responses. Repetitive questions are used to compel the government to provide a concrete strategy regarding inflation control policy.

The rhetorical style is sharp, critical, and incisive, underscoring the hypocrisy of the government's actions and the deepening crisis of trust within society. Strong contrasts are employed ("reality versus appearance," "words versus deeds"), and the argumentation is supported by detailed economic data and references to specific development plans. Although the tone is demanding and principled, the speaker concludes their remarks by stressing their goodwill.

The style is highly confrontational, demanding, and accusatory, particularly directed at the prime minister, who is accused of sidestepping answers and misleading the public. The speaker employs a repetitive questioning structure (ten questions) and sharply highlights the complete lack of information ("zero bits of information"). The tone is ironic, referencing the prime minister having become "very shy" and stressing that this represents "the largest possible financial expenditure in post-independence Estonia."

The rhetorical style is highly combative, condemnatory, and emotionally charged. It employs strong moral appeals (such as accusations of lying and concerns about the well-being of the elderly). The text utilizes both logical arguments (statistics, analyses) and extreme comparisons, describing the policy as the construction of a "Pol Pot society" and the implementation of "overseer rule." The conclusion is resolute and promising, declaring the abolition of the tax.

The tone is businesslike, analytical, and urgent, emphasizing the complexity of the situation and the need to look toward an uncertain future. The appeal is primarily logical and policy-based, focusing on legal and strategic solutions. The style is formal and includes direct calls for the government to take action.

The rhetorical style is urgent and combative, emphasizing the crisis situation and labeling Estonia "the black champion of price hikes." The speech is structured around logical arguments and data, but its goal is political mobilization and the formation of a unified counter-force in parliament. Strong imagery is employed, such as calling the car tax a "chimera" that must be eliminated, and the reference, "Carthage will be destroyed."