By Plenary Sessions: Züleyxa Izmailova

The main opponents are the Centre Party and Eesti 200. The Centre Party is sharply criticized, and their previous inaction regarding lowering energy prices and VAT on foodstuffs while they were in government is labeled hypocritical. Eesti 200 is accused of hypocrisy concerning the issue of targeted subsidies. The criticism is primarily policy- and performance-based.

Strong opposition is directed at the government led by the Reform Party, Prime Minister Kristen Michal, and a specific minister. The criticism is policy- and results-based, accusing them of failing to protect nature, making biodiversity protection toothless by changing RMK’s expectations, and letting down the process of drafting the climate law. The opposition is intense, claiming that the government is giving momentum to the devastation of the nature that still remains.

The primary opposition is directed at the government and the Reform Party, who are criticized for their tax policy and budget management. The criticism is both political and substantive, accusing the Reform Party of abandoning right-wing politics and implementing unfair taxation that harms purchasing power. Furthermore, the government is criticized for taking out a quick, high-interest loan (an "SMS loan") to cover current expenses and for favoring the wealthy.

The primary target is Minister Jürgen Ligi and the budget he presented. The criticism is aimed both at the policy itself (a large deficit, unfair redistribution) and at his personal motives and values, effectively questioning the minister's conscience and patriotism. The attacks are intense and directly demand to know who is forcing the minister to make these kinds of decisions.

The confrontation is directed squarely at the government and ministers, accusing them of causing chaos and pursuing an unfair budgetary policy. The criticism is intense and policy-driven, addressing both the budget deficit and procedural errors in the implementation of education reforms (specifically, the failure to assess their impact). There is no information available regarding a willingness to compromise; the focus remains strictly on strong opposition.