By Plenary Sessions: Aleksandr Tšaplõgin

The rhetorical style is sharp and confrontational, using emotionally charged terms like "propaganda" and highlighting the crisis situation. The questions are direct and demand that the government assess specific financial and administrative resources, as well as legal risks. The tone is rather concerned and accusatory, focusing on the government's inaction or misplaced priorities.

The rhetorical style is provocative, ironic, and sarcastic, utilizing a rhetorical question to ridicule the opponent's position. The speaker relies on emotional impact and a well-known cynical saying ("Money doesn't stink") to emphasize their criticism. The tone is combative and shocking rather than logical.

The style is direct and centered on questions, emphasizing the urgency of the topic and employing rhetorical questions to criticize the state's inaction. The speaker adopts an appreciative and respectful tone toward the colleague ("competent and humane," "dear Jana"), which balances the critical political content. Both emotional appeals (referencing those in need) and logical appeals (comparison with other countries) are utilized.

The rhetorical style starts polite but quickly becomes direct and confrontational, employing sharp questions regarding political discord and dishonesty. The speaker concludes with a direct accusation of lying, which indicates a very high level of conflict and a rapid shift from a courteous tone to an aggressive one. The style is generally logical and fact-based, focusing on refuting the opposing side's claims.

The tone is serious and urgent, emphasizing the gravity of the social situation and the widespread hardship faced by citizens. The style is formal (addressing the minister) and employs an emotional appeal, describing the financial distress of thousands of people to underscore the necessity of a budgetary solution.