By Plenary Sessions: Aleksandr Tšaplõgin

The style is confrontational and direct, employing powerful rhetorical questions that challenge the opposing party's motives and capacity for empathy ("Do you not trust your own people?"). The appeals combine logical, data-driven criticism (subsidies) with an emotional defense of the populace.

The rhetorical style is sharply critical and combative, employing strong negative assessments such as "bad bill" and "insane green transition." The arguments are primarily logical and fact-based, focusing on costs, unreliability, and statistical comparisons with other European countries.

The rhetorical style is critical, formal, and imperative, underscoring the gravity of the situation and the potential for catastrophe (the loss of control over food production). The speaker relies heavily on logical arguments and data to substantiate the necessity of swift political change. The minister's reply is criticized for its lack of sufficient specificity.