By Plenary Sessions: Kalle Grünthal

The main opponents are the coalition, the Social Democrats ("Socs"), and a specific colleague, Andre Hanimägi, whom he calls a proponent of a digital concentration camp. The criticism is intense and ranges from political opposition (Rail Baltic, the surveillance system) to accusations of engaging in illegal surveillance activities. No willingness to compromise is expressed; instead, the demands are for the termination of illegal activities and withdrawal from the agreements.

Direct criticism is aimed at the Reform Party for blocking the scheduling of the motor vehicle tax bill, and at the Riigikogu Board for the inefficient use of working time. Politically, there is opposition to EU regulations that create monopolies and serve the interests of large manufacturers. The criticism is primarily procedural and policy-based.

The primary targets are the Reform Party and the government led by Kaja Kallas, who stand accused of imposing new taxes and manipulating approval ratings. Particularly harsh criticism is aimed at President Alar Karis and the Riigikogu's "warmongers," who are charged with ignorantly destroying the state by advocating for the use of long-range weaponry. The resistance is intense and uncompromising, culminating in calls for the government's immediate removal.

Strong opposition is directed at the government and the coalition, who stand accused of implementing unconstitutional activities and demonstrating a lack of professional expertise within the committees. The Social Democrats (Riina Sikkut) face particular criticism for supporting a surveillance society, while government officials are criticized for inciting crimes against the state. The criticism spans policy, procedural matters, and the personal level (specifically, a lack of competence).

Criticism is directed at various government agencies that violated personal data processing rules and failed to inform citizens. The backlash is intense because critics are focusing on the lack of sanctions and the cessation of surveillance without any legal accountability. The criticism targets both procedural and legal failures.

The primary opponent is the minister, who stands accused of concealing the truth and rigidly adhering to a narrative dating back to the start of the pandemic. The criticism is intense, encompassing both political accusations (regarding vaccine safety) and personal attacks (specifically, refusing to participate in debates and attend the conference). The speaker demands a direct confrontation and accountability from the adversary.

The criticism is aimed at the procedure and those who were missing, citing low attendance during the session. This is a procedural rather than a political attack, which calls into question the fulfillment of work obligations by members of parliament.

The confrontation is directed against the actions of the government and the responsible ministries (the Ministry of Defense), criticizing their ability to guarantee national security and identify threats. The criticism is sharp and focuses on deficiencies in the country's defense capabilities, suggesting that the government is unaware of the seriousness of the threat.

The primary adversaries are the Riigikogu Board (Lauri Hussar, Toomas Kivimägi) and government ministers (Kristen Michal, Margus Tsahkna). The criticism is intense, targeting both specific political decisions (the car tax) and procedural violations (the overemphasis on the committees' right to self-organization). He publicly accuses ministers and officials of lying and engaging in anti-state activity, while simultaneously rejecting the "exceptions" proposed by the Board.