By Plenary Sessions: Yoko Alender

The confrontation is directed at those spreading false claims regarding local benefits in the energy sector, and those who depict nature conservation as an uncontrollably proliferating "fungus." Especially sharp criticism is leveled against economically unsound proposals for subsidizing oil shale, stressing that state funds are public money. Furthermore, it is alleged that certain statements have "shattered" the identity associated with the nature conservation movement.

The criticism focuses on earlier legislative mistakes that generated resentment and confusion among private forest owners regarding the imposition of restrictions in Natura areas. Furthermore, the use of morally inappropriate historical parallels in the debate is sharply denounced, being labeled as regrettable and entirely out of place in the chamber.

The criticism is directed at the Deputy Chairman of the Economic Committee for providing false information (false claims) and at the Isamaa party for opposing the island operation bill. The criticism of Isamaa is policy-based, given that their opposition would cause peak load prices to triple. The speaker recommends that Isamaa rethink its position.