By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The rhetorical style is analytical, inquisitive, and constructive, centering on clarifying the details of the draft law and the risks associated with its implementation. The appeals are primarily logical and procedural, emphasizing the necessity of avoiding arbitrary decision-making and subsequent disputes. The speaker employs formal language, addressing colleagues and seeking clarification regarding the deliberations.

The speaking style is predominantly combative, skeptical, and critical, frequently employing rhetorical questions and irony (e.g., referring to the minister as a "world-beater" or the draft legislation as an "ego project"). Appeals are made to logic, long-term economic stability, and national interests, challenging the underlying assumptions of the government's policy. The tone is formal, but includes sharp personal remarks.

Toon is critical, demanding, and at times ironic, particularly when addressing the Prime Minister, whom he accuses of selecting the wrong experts and failing to provide an adequate information package. He employs logical appeals, relying on documents and examples drawn from foreign countries (Spain, Poland). His questions are often presented as direct recommendations or demands aimed at altering the government's action plan.

The rhetorical style is predominantly critical and at times combative, particularly regarding opponents and the centralization of the European Union. The discourse employs both logical, data-driven questions (such as Elering’s financial status) and strong ideological assessments (e.g., "technocrats," "embarrassing"), and specific confirmations and promises are demanded from the ministers.

The speaker employs an extremely aggressive, accusatory, and uncompromising style, utilizing strong metaphors and labeling ("mumbo-jumbo," "moral degenerates," "steamroller government," "heads should roll"). He balances logical appeals (budget figures, legal statutes) with emotional and value-based calls, particularly regarding culture and the green transition. The tone is ironic and sarcastic, especially when responding to ministers and criticizing the naivety of coalition politicians.

The style is formal, yet sharply interrogative and challenging, using the minister's previous quotes (e.g., "Excel Man" vs. "Word Man") to demand accountability. The speaker employs loaded language ("crazy ideas," "courage") and presents hypothetical scenarios to expose the minister's ideological positions and management style. The tone is skeptical and demanding.