By Plenary Sessions: Riina Solman

The style of the address is formal and respectful (directed at the chairman and the presenter/rapporteur). However, the tone is simultaneously concerned and critical, emphasizing the inevitable continuation of the economic downturn. Logical argumentation is employed, based on comparing economic results, with the criticism being presented in the form of a question.

The style is formal and respectful, addressing the Speaker of the Riigikogu and the rapporteur. The speech is logical and analytical, focusing on demanding specific political plans and solutions. The tone is concerned, emphasizing the seriousness of the problem ("tends to become even more depleted").

A distinctly urgent, passionate, and at times confrontational tone, especially when criticizing the Reform Party. It employs strong emotional and morality-based appeals, emphasizing that "politics is the art of signals" and that actions, not words, are what truly count. Metaphors are used (e.g., the "killing" of a draft bill, the Reform Party as a "stump"), and reference is made to the loss of trust felt by families.

The style is formal and respectful, especially when thanking the Chancellor of Justice and the Deputy Speaker of the Riigikogu, but it also includes personal humor related to being confused with Riina Sikkut. The speaker employs an analytical approach, posing direct questions regarding the legal basis of the draft legislation to ensure balance and coherence.

The speaker's rhetorical style is confrontational and critical, employing strong accusations concerning personal conduct and political hypocrisy (the pot calling the kettle black). Both logical appeals (demanding an evidence-based approach) and emotional accusations (referencing offensive and stigmatizing posts) are utilized. The overall tone is formal, but the substance is sharp and direct.

The style is confrontational and critical, aimed particularly at the Minister of Finance and the government, utilizing direct questions and requests (referred to as a "question-request"). The speaker employs both political substance and rhetorical devices to attack political opponents, specifically criticizing a government colleague for using uncensored language. The tone is formal but sharp, emphasizing the necessity of supporting families and calling the government to order.

The style is direct, critical, and demanding, particularly regarding the quality of the minister's response, requiring accountability and a clear timeline for implementing the salary model. Sharp contrasts (the young soldier versus the leadership) are employed to highlight the injustice. The introduction features a brief self-deprecating joke concerning the mention of the Supreme Court, which lends an initial lightness to the overall tone.

The speaker’s rhetorical style is combative and forceful, often employing emotional and personal appeals (e.g., the desperate pleas of large families, a heartbreaking letter) to illustrate the negative impact of policy. They are highly critical of opponents, accusing ministers of violating the constitution, inciting hatred, and lying (e.g., referencing Kaja Kallas). The style is formal, but often sharp and adversarial.