By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The tone is predominantly critical, combative, and direct, employing strong judgmental language (e.g., "mess," "to grab/hoard"). Rhetorical questions are directed at the minister to highlight the contradictions between his words and actions. The author appeals to logic, criticizing the government for rushing the process and subsequently "fiddling" with amendments.

The tone is predominantly combative, critical, and at times provocative, employing strong and condemnatory language. It accuses opponents of demagoguery and hypocrisy, particularly regarding excise duties and the green transition. It utilizes both logical arguments (such as OECD forecasts and statistics) and emotional appeals, focusing attention on specific details (e.g., the pronunciation of a name) and procedural mistakes.

The style is formal and question-oriented, focusing on logical clarity regarding the details of international financing and the wording of the draft bill. Furthermore, the presentation includes an atypical, slightly personal, and humorous digression, in which the minister is asked to justify comments made about attire (tie clips).