By Plenary Sessions: Kristina Šmigun-Vähi

Insufficient data

The style is formal, direct, and procedural, posing pointed questions to the minister. The address is logical and focuses on political gaps (specifically, the absence of accountability and penalties), avoiding emotional appeals. The tone is critically constructive, starting with an acknowledgment of the minister's viewpoint.

The rhetorical style is predominantly formal, neutral, and procedural, centering on a detailed overview of the commission’s work and timelines. The speaker employs a logical and fact-based approach when explaining procedural decisions. In the responses, the tone is straightforward, emphasizing consensus and the futility of bureaucracy.

The style is formal, informative, and procedure-oriented, focusing on the transmission of the Commission's decisions to the plenary. The tone is moderately urgent, emphasizing the need to ensure rapid legal certainty for economic operators. The rhetoric is logical and fact-based, lacking emotional or narrative appeals.

The rhetorical style is formal and respectful, suitable for addressing a question to a minister during a plenary session ("Esteemed Chair! Honorable Minister!"). The address is logic-based and problem-focused, emphasizing the complexity of the task and requiring concrete plans for strengthening activities at the local level.

The style is formal, respectful, and inquisitive, focusing on logical argumentation and seeking clarification. The speaker employs self-deprecation ("I am not any specialist"), but then poses a sharp, technically detailed question regarding nuclear power plant pollution, while simultaneously apologizing for the language they used.

The speaking style is formal and respectful, addressing the session chair and the minister directly. The rhetoric balances practical political issues (measures, training) with deep ethical and emotional considerations. One question includes an element of personal hesitation ("I thought long about whether to ask this or not."), which lends a reflective tone to the presentation.

The style is formal and respectful, directly addressing the chairman of the session and the minister. The address is analytical, presenting a clear problem (the support of young athletes) and requesting specific political solutions. The appeal is logical and focuses on improving political mechanisms.

The rhetorical style is passionate, motivating, and simultaneously contains concrete proposals, utilizing both logical and emotional appeals. The speaker uses personal stories from childhood and family hikes to establish an emotional connection and underscore the value of physical activity. The tone is that of an advocate, urging both parents and the state to lead by example and take responsibility ("Go get moving, go to the woods!").

The rhetorical style is extremely formal, neutral, and procedural, focusing on the precise presentation of facts and the course of proceedings. The address is structured around chronological reporting, utilizing official terminology and the names of institutions. Emotional or persuasive elements are absent; the address is purely an informative report on the work of the steering committee.

The rhetorical style is formal, informative, and neutral, typical of a committee rapporteur's briefing. The speaker focuses on conveying facts and procedural decisions, avoiding emotional appeals while emphasizing consensus and comprehensive answers. He/She uses the repetitive phrase "Thank you for the question" to introduce the answers.

The address is formal and respectful, politely engaging both the presiding officer of the session and the Chancellor of Justice. A clear and logical format is used for posing the question, illustrating the abstract topic of rights with a concrete and easily understandable example (the kindergarten and the choice of beverages).

The rhetorical style is one of concern and directness, emphasizing the seriousness of the problem and the economic damage caused by bureaucracy. The speaker uses a formal address (Esteemed President/Chairman) and supports their logical argument with a specific example drawn from a foreign visit and feedback received from investment consultants.

The speech is analytical and formal in tone, focusing on logical arguments and justifying the effectiveness of the policy. Data (e.g., statistics on 5% child participation) and technical terms (operational support, umbrella organizations) are used. The second speech is short and procedural, expressing the faction's position.

The style is formal and respectful, utilizing the addresses "esteemed Chair of the Session" and "esteemed Presenter." The rhetoric is logical and analytical, beginning with the establishment of an economic premise in order to arrive at specific questions concerning expert disputes and investment choices. The tone is information-seeking and rational.

The style is formal and respectful, with the speaker repeatedly addressing the session chairman and the rapporteur. The speaker primarily uses logical and leading questions to gain clarity regarding policy implementation and accountability. The emphasis is placed on facts and examples from foreign countries (the Nordic states), rather than on emotional persuasion.

The tone is formal, yet concerned and urgent, balancing support for ambitious goals with the presentation of a frightening reality. A logical appeal is used, emphasizing the growing trend of the problem (the number of overweight children) and posing a direct question regarding the state's actions.

The style is initially optimistic and supportive, expressing emotional approval ("my heart rejoices," "I am very, very pleased") regarding the Minister's action plan. The speaker poses a specific political question, using a logical comparison with Latvia to explore the possibilities of financial incentives.

The rhetorical style is interrogative and solution-focused, addressing the minister directly with a question regarding political viability. Logical arguments are employed, based on comparisons with the Nordic countries and stressing the necessity of speed and cost-effectiveness. The tone is formal, yet it also incorporates a figurative expression when describing potential manufacturers ("men with golden hands").

The speaker's style is polite and inquisitive, presenting their proposal more as an idea that has been brewing in their head. Simple, accessible language is used, emphasizing an emotional and value-based appeal (taking responsibility as "just a human thing"). The overall tone is rather reflective and constructive.

The rhetorical style is highly formal and respectful, courteously addressing both the session chair and the presenter. The address is brief and focuses on posing a logical, information-seeking question, devoid of emotional appeals.

The tone is concerned and blunt, highlighting the societal repercussions that result from overemphasizing children's rights. The speaker employs strong, value-driven arguments (e.g., referring to a "soft generation") and poses rhetorical questions to underscore the necessity of legislative intervention. The style is rather emotional and problem-centric, aiming for practical solutions.