By Plenary Sessions: Peeter Ernits

The criticism is aimed both at the previous government's failed energy plans and at the ministers of the current government. The speaker questions the forecasts presented by the ministers regarding the minimal impact of the regulations and directly opposes a colleague's proposal concerning sustainability reporting.

The opposition is aimed at the government's inaction or lack of clarity in implementing financial regulations (e.g., the stalling of instant payments). The criticism is policy- and procedure-driven, demanding clear information and explanations from the responsible minister regarding the content of the directives' comparison table.

The main targets of criticism are the government and ministers, whose priorities and actions are being called into question. The criticism focuses on the political balance and the inadequate representation of national interests, particularly concerning the failure to utilize Estonian businesses. The criticism is policy- and performance-based.

The criticism is aimed at the governing coalition and the proposers of the bills, who are accused of engaging in busywork and provocative behavior. He/She sharply criticizes the mocking of the US President and the imposition of gender balance quotas. The criticism is primarily procedural (timing, priorities) and political (the direction of foreign policy).

The criticism is primarily aimed at the drafters of the bills (officials) for the unequal consideration of institutional opinions, citing as an example the near-zero weight given to the opinion of the Pärnu County Court. The sharpest opposition is directed at the activities of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament) as a whole, which is viewed as a passive "rubber stamp" that fails to consider the future.

The challenge is directed at the minister to obtain information and accountability, focusing on the minister's personal conduct as a private citizen and their experiences with fraud. The criticism is primarily informative and does not include political or personal attacks, but instead demands the sharing of knowledge.

The criticism is aimed more at the format and procedure of the parliamentary debate, where speakers may talk about irrelevant matters before expressing their actual position. Specific opponents or political groups are not being criticized.

The criticism is aimed at the ruling coalition (the Reform Party and Eesti 200), whose power he believes needs to be curtailed. He also criticizes the operations of the Ministry of Justice, particularly Jürgen Ligi, whom he describes as the "master of the state." Ligi is accused of behaving arrogantly, interrupting the Justice Minister's presentation and dismissing the proceedings as "pointless rubbish."

The main criticism is aimed at the government and the minister, who are accused of inaction, incompetence, and allowing fines to be incurred. The criticism is procedural (failure to adopt the directive) and financial, demanding financial accountability from the government.