By Plenary Sessions: Rene Kokk

The main opponents are the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Internal Affairs, and more broadly, the Government of the Republic. Criticism is aimed both at political decisions (fine rates, special tools) and procedural opacity (the budget, lack of argumentation). The opposition is intense, demanding the rejection of the draft bill and comprehensive solutions to security issues, calling the minister's actions a "half-finished calculation."

The challenge is directed against the policies and procedures of the Government of the Republic, criticizing the additional burden imposed by new regulations (the sustainability report) and the disproportionate increase in fine rates. The criticism is both policy-based and procedural, demanding that the government clarify the rationale behind these decisions and present its underlying considerations.

The primary opposition is the government and the minister in charge, whose policies are being criticized for incompetence, short-sightedness, and irrational resource management. Criticism is also aimed at ministry officials (the Deputy Secretary General) who have spent years advancing issues that previous ministers had deliberately shelved. The government’s actions are being compared to the practices seen in European countries (Italy-Albania), where problems are simply offloaded onto weaker states.

The main opponents are the government as a whole, the Minister of Finance, and Läänemets, the leader of the Social Democrats. Criticism is aimed both at the government’s procedures (specifically, the basis for tax increases, which relies on a small number of companies) and at administrative irregularities. Furthermore, the minister’s personal attitude and rhetoric are also under fire.

Strong opposition is directed at the policies of the Ministry of Finance and the Minister (Jürgen), especially concerning excise duty hikes. The criticism is both political (ineffective measures, loss of tax revenue) and ideological, accusing them of adopting social democratic (Läänemets's) anti-consumption ideas. The Reform Party is also criticized for abandoning its previous principle of focusing on economic growth.

The main criticism is aimed at the actions of the ministry and the minister, accusing them of incompetence and inefficient cost management. The criticism focuses on specific policy changes (reducing subsidies, extending processing times) and administrative decisions (IT costs versus jobs). No willingness to compromise has been expressed; instead, they demand that the existing IT system be made operational.

The opposition is directed at the initiators of the bill and its content, demanding the immediate cessation of the proceedings. The criticism is intense and fundamental, calling into question the entire idea of allowing pedophiles the opportunity to work with children. Compromise is ruled out, as the complete termination of any further processing of the bill is being demanded.

The main criticism is aimed at the government and ministers, who are accused of lacking strategic oversight and being incompetent. Particular criticism is leveled against the minister who is seemingly unaware of the high unemployment rate among Estonians, while simultaneously proposing to triple the immigration quota. The criticism is intense and centers on political failure.

The primary criticism is aimed at the Government of the Republic and former Climate Minister Kristen Michal, faulting them for both the delayed response and the insufficient prioritization of road construction. The current situation is being contrasted with the achievements of the national-conservative government that took office in 2019, which originally initiated the projects currently in progress.