By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The rhetorical style is sharply aggressive, polemical, and often ironic, utilizing sarcasm (e.g., the recommendation to abolish HÕNTE) and strong emotional appeals. He uses personal examples (his three sons) to emphasize the moral dimension of broken promises and accuses the government of "fleecing" the people. The speaker employs strong ideological terminology, referring to members of the coalition as "modern-day Reds."

The rhetorical style is predominantly combative, critical, and sharp, employing strong emotional expressions ("to insane ideas," "a death sentence," "the worst prime minister"). It relies on international sources and strongly opposes ideological policies, presenting its views as value-based and forceful criticism. It utilizes irony and direct personal attacks (Prime Minister Kallas).

The rhetorical style is analytical, fact-based, and didactic, aiming to calm the public and correct misinformation. The speaker employs logical arguments and numerical comparisons, even suggesting practical steps (such as purchasing a dosimeter) to enhance understanding. The tone is professional and specific, focusing on data and historical examples.

The style is critical and probing, utilizing rhetorical questions to challenge the opposing side's viewpoints and push them to the point of absurdity. The speaker employs irony and sarcasm when describing the ideal vision of "efficient functioning," where the coalition votes on bills without any participation from the opposition. The tone is direct and challenging.

The speaker employs a critical and occasionally sarcastic rhetorical style, utilizing irony (for instance, colleague Ligi’s sincere belief in the weight of his vote). He/She uses logical analogies (notary, the election of the Riigikogu board, pension certification) to underscore the state's inconsistent standards, and bolsters his/her arguments with extensive quotations drawn from the feedback provided by interest groups (Eesti Energia, the Estonian Gas Association).

The rhetorical style is critical, concerned, and demanding, especially in relation to safety and budget cuts. Irony is employed regarding the delay in responding to the inquiry ("the snowdrifts would have melted"), and logical arguments are relied upon, referencing specific accidents and feedback from road users. The speaker maintains a formal tone, addressing the Minister directly.

The style is highly confrontational, emotional, and sharply critical, expressing anger towards the government’s actions and accusing ministers of demagoguery and talking "stupid nonsense." It employs figurative and memorable phrases ("pouring money down the drain," "the airfield has been rigged") and accuses the presiding officer of suppressing the opposition's voice. The concept of "newspeak" is also utilized to criticize the government's terminology regarding social policy.

The rhetorical style is courteous, modest, and straightforward, emphasizing the speaker's status as a young politician. The speaker prefers a quick and specific answer, requesting that long discussions be avoided in order to maintain a good tempo for the session. The tone is rather logical and information-seeking.

The address is formal and analytical, concentrating on posing questions and clarifying procedural details. References are utilized, citing colleagues' inquiries and the presenter's figurative expressions ("hills and valleys") to further develop the speaker's arguments. The tone is probing and focuses heavily on legal precision.

The rhetorical style is direct, critical, and concerned, particularly regarding security issues, employing cautionary examples (such as Germany) and logical argumentation. The tone is challenging toward the government, demanding explanations for both legislative inaction and decisions that weaken the state's resilience. Finally, a procedural protest is lodged against the Prime Minister's conduct.