By Plenary Sessions: Urmas Kruuse

The speaker does not directly criticize the opponents, but instead asks the presenter to lay out the core arguments against the creation of the nuclear power plant. The stance is neutral and focused on gathering information, with the goal of understanding the strength and substance of the potential opposition.

The stance is critically inquisitive, casting doubt on the minister's satisfaction with the regional activities of the theaters. A specific opponent is not criticized; rather, questions are raised about the effectiveness of the policy, pointing to a systemic problem.

There is no direct criticism of opponents, but the speaker indirectly criticizes the state and society as a whole for downplaying the issue and providing insufficient funding. Specifically, they reproach the Ministry of Education and Research for the "paltry" funding allocated to veterinary education, which fails to cover the actual costs. The criticism is aimed at systemic and attitudinal deficiencies.

There is no position of opposition. The address focuses on the technical content of the draft bill and the consensus-based procedural decisions reached in the committee.