By Plenary Sessions: Rene Kokk

The primary opposition is directed at the policies of the minister and the government, criticizing their justifications concerning pension policy as inadequate. The criticism is policy-based, focusing on the illogicality of social policy and demanding an investigation into alternative areas for savings (NGOs).

The main criticism is aimed at the Ministry of Education and Research, which is being accused of "digging its heels in" and failing to solve the problem. The criticism also extends to the Ministry of Rural Affairs and its officials, who are suspected of being unable to explain the issue in plain Estonian or even grasp its core nature. The criticism targets inaction and procedural inefficiency.

The criticism is directed against the government’s policy, which is detrimental to the transport sector, specifically citing the increase in diesel excise duty and the introduction of new road usage fees. It criticizes the institutional delay and two decades of inaction on this issue. Furthermore, it employs an ironic attack against coalition members, calling into question their commitment to integration.

The criticism is directed at the actions of the minister and the government, particularly concerning the assurance of data security and the control of bureaucracy. The opposition is policy- and results-based, demanding concrete steps from the government to improve the situation.

The criticism is aimed at the Chairman of the Legal Affairs Committee (for the poor working environment and pressuring members) and at officials who are accused of the violent Estonianization of Ukrainian children. The attacks are intense and concern both procedural issues and the setting of political objectives.

The main opponent is the ruling coalition and officials from the Ministry of Finance, who are being criticized both for their policies (tax hikes, ignoring rural areas) and for violating procedural rules. The criticism is intense, accusing the government of being out of touch with reality and demonstrating a poor attitude towards families (referencing the cut to the large family allowance). No willingness to compromise has been expressed; instead, the demand is for the bill to be rejected outright.

The main adversary is the prime minister, who is sharply criticized for presenting dishonest and incomplete facts that distort the actual situation. The criticism is aimed at the government's policies (tax hikes, inflation) and their communication methods. No willingness to compromise has been expressed; instead, the government is being demanded to provide a full accounting.