By Plenary Sessions: Varro Vooglaid

The speaker sharply opposes the actions of the government and the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), criticizing the lack of accountability for "mistakes, or even outright outrages," committed in the exercise of state power. The criticism is primarily procedural and constitutional, accusing the opposing side (including colleague Hanimägi and the Social Democrats) of supporting the framework of a surveillance society. He rejects any possibility of compromise regarding the support of bills that violate the constitution.

The confrontation is directed at the ruling coalition, which is accused of doing the exact opposite of fulfilling two fundamental promises (taxes and budget balance). The criticism is intense and politically charged, emphasizing that even the war in Ukraine is not a sufficient excuse for reneging on these commitments. The actions of the opponents are described as a movement away from equilibrium.

The criticism is aimed at the drafters of the bill due to the regulatory ambiguity, which grants officials excessively broad discretion. The criticism is policy-driven and focuses on procedural deficiencies that could force citizens to prove their parenthood in court.

The primary targets of criticism are the Prime Minister and the government, who face accusations of dishonesty, misconduct, and carrying out foolish, ill-conceived operations. The criticism is particularly pointed towards the Prime Minister, who branded questions posed by members of parliament as Russian propaganda. The critique is intense and accusatory, highlighting the absence of political culture and the generation of security threats.

The main opponents are the parliamentary majority and the committee chairs, who are criticized for pushing through unconstitutional laws while ignoring prior warnings. The opposition is particularly fierce regarding the initiatives put forth by the Financial Intelligence Unit (RAB), the Police and Border Guard Board (PPA), and the Ministry of the Interior, all of which he considers totalitarian. He demands that the bills be completely scrapped, not merely amended.

The main criticism is directed at the government representative who failed to answer the questions substantively, instead offering general remarks about the effects of the war, which points to dissatisfaction with the government's transparency and accountability. Furthermore, the speaker asks his colleague Peeter Ernits not to interrupt while the question is being posed, which constitutes a procedural objection. The criticism is aimed at the concealment of information and the provision of vague answers.

The criticism is aimed at the insufficient preparation and competence of the majority of Riigikogu members to carry out their constitutional oversight duties. This is procedural and competence-based criticism regarding the quality of the exercise of legislative power, and it is not directed at a specific political opponent.

The main opposition is directed at the administrative area of the Ministry of Defence and the responsible minister, whose proposed solution (hiring additional staff) is deemed insufficient. The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural failure, organizational confusion, and the avoidance of responsibility.

The main opponent is the health minister, who is sharply criticized for both political hypocrisy and spreading misinformation. The attacks are intense, accusing the minister of personally practicing "quackery" and supporting a "dictatorial program." The criticism is aimed at both political gain (achieving the ministerial position through misinformation) and the suppression of fundamental rights.

The main targets are the Minister of Defence and the ministry's leadership, who are severely criticized for systemic financial mismanagement and refusing to take responsibility. The criticism is intense, demanding the resignation of the Minister and the Secretary-General. Furthermore, the presiding officer of the session is also criticized for ignoring procedural matters.

The primary targets are the governing coalition and the Riigikogu Presidium, who face intense criticism regarding both political decisions (tax increases, funding for abortions) and systematic procedural breaches. Specifically, the Presidium is accused of denying opposition members the right to ask questions and arbitrarily interpreting the Law on Internal Rules and Procedure. The criticism is severe, and there is an uncompromising demand for strict adherence to the law.