By Plenary Sessions: Rene Kokk

The opposition's stance is directed against the Government of the Republic, criticizing both the transparency in the management of state reserves and the legislative procedures themselves. They particularly sharply criticize the way substantive discussion of opposition bills is avoided using boilerplate responses, demanding an end to the political squabbling. The criticism targets procedural unfairness and a lack of substantive work.

The confrontation is directed against the government, which is sharply criticized for creating procedural hurdles in the legislative process. The core of the criticism is that the government dismisses the opposition's draft bills with a formal reply stating that they are already handling the matter themselves—a response that is, in reality, intended to kill the process entirely.

The primary criticism is aimed at the Reform Party-led government, which is accused of neglecting road infrastructure construction and reducing the number of cars in the name of the green transition. The criticism is intense, rejecting the "Rail Baltic euphoria" and accusing the government of denying the truth about the project's cost-effectiveness. The opposition focuses on policy and procedure (the failure of land acquisition).

The speaker is clearly positioned in the opposition, criticizing the minister's vague response and faulting the coalition for its lack of interest in the discussion. The criticism targets both the government's procedural conduct and its economic policy, specifically citing negative "tax hikes." He/She employs irony to underscore the government's incompetence or lack of clarity.

The criticism is directed both at those who hesitated regarding the relocation of the monument and at institutions that allow legal proceedings to become a method for punishing political opponents. Separately, the Ministry of Justice’s arguments concerning conflicts of interest are challenged, highlighting the contradiction with the practice of the shared location of the prosecutor’s office and judges.

The primary criticism is aimed at the coalition, the government, and the Ministry of Social Affairs, who are accused of having an ideological problem and an unwillingness to substantively solve a serious social issue. The criticism is intense and politically charged, citing the coalition’s first move to cut child benefits.

The primary confrontation is aimed at the Reform Party and its long-standing member, who is being directly addressed with questions in their capacity as the committee chairman. The criticism targets both the legislative procedure and the historical unfairness inherent in tax policy (specifically VAT), thereby calling into question whether previous promises have been fulfilled.

The primary conflict is with the government, particularly the Ministry of Climate and the Ministry of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, criticizing their failure to reconsider the Green Transition policy. The criticism is policy- and performance-based, accusing the CO2 quota system of driving industry out of Europe. Furthermore, the previous composition of the Riigikogu is criticized for its decision to tax wood-fired boiler houses.