By Plenary Sessions: Riina Sikkut

The speaker employs a substantive and well-reasoned style, combining ideological endorsement (the progressive income tax is part of the SDE platform) with a detailed defense of policy. The tone is persuasive and direct, particularly when addressing criticism, where the speaker rejects accusations of totalitarianism and defends the necessity of state-imposed regulations. The appeals are primarily logical and fact-based, emphasizing the guarantee of fairness and higher quality decision-making.

The style is analytical, critical, and at times confrontational, especially when challenging the minister's responses. Strong logical arguments and direct quotes (especially from the IMF report) are used to dispute the government's positions. The tone is formal and interrogative, seeking to demonstrate that the government distorts expert assessments and breaks previous promises.

The style is critical and analytical, often employing rhetorical questions and ironic parallels (e.g., comparing the Finland/Sweden nuclear power plant argument to the progressive income tax argument). The tone is values-driven, particularly concerning environmental issues, where it contrasts the fear of deforestation with the fear of placing forests under protection. The address is formal and directed straight to the Minister.

The rhetorical style is analytical and question-oriented, addressing the minister directly with specific proposals. The tone is serious and emphasizes the exceptional importance of ensuring the quality of education, linking this necessity to future technological challenges. The appeal itself is logical, focusing on the acquisition of specific skills.

The speaker’s rhetorical style is formal and detailed when presenting the draft proposal, but becomes passionate and confident when answering questions. She/He uses strong value-based arguments (the necessity of including the experience of competent women in the decision-making process) and is prepared to respond to sharp attacks directly, labeling opponents as prejudiced or cynical.

The style is assertive and critical, focusing on calling into question the minister's political choices and accountability. The speaker employs a formal and logical approach, relying on laws and planning documents, but also incorporates emotional elements, highlighting the economic predicament of platform workers and the mental health of children. The recurring question regarding political responsibility and resignation demonstrates high intensity.