By Agendas: Katrin Kuusemäe

The main opponents are Isamaa, the Centre Party (Keskerakond), and the Social Democrats, who are accused of establishing an unfair tax system. The criticism is policy-based, focusing on their desire to continue imposing higher taxation on those earning the average wage. The speaker casts doubt on the opponents' criticism regarding inflation and questions their motives.

The speaker maintains neutrality personally but relays the position of the Government of the Republic, which did not support the draft bill. The government's critique was both policy-based and procedural, stressing that the explanatory memorandum failed to address the socio-economic impacts resulting from the addition of an extra day off. The government was of the opinion that the total number of rest days should be based on internal balance.

The speaker himself is not expressing opposition, but rather conveying the opposition of the Government of the Republic to the bill initiated by the Social Democratic Party. The government's criticism was political and economic in nature, warning of the potential negative impact this could have on employers and noting that similar bills have been repeatedly introduced, regarding which the government has maintained a conservative line.

It avoids expressing direct confrontation. Instead, it addresses the timing of the referendum initiated by the bill's submitters (the Center Party), raising the possibility of holding it only after 2026. It also rejects the assertion that the Estonian people do not trust the government.

Kuusemäe opposes the bill initiated by the faction of the Estonian Conservative People's Party, supporting its rejection on both procedural and substantive grounds. His opposition is directed at the necessity of the bill, arguing that it would duplicate the work of the State Agency of Medicines. He notes two committee members (Poolamets and Valge) who were against the rejection.

The speaker conveys the opposition of the Government of the Republic and the majority of the committee to the bill initiated by the EKRE faction, which was aimed at increasing the transparency of the expenses of the Chancellor of Justice and the Prosecutor General. The opposition is primarily procedural and policy-based, citing the necessity of amending all laws comprehensively and the lack of an implementing act.

Insufficient data

The address does not criticize any opposing side or group; the focus is on internal procedures and consensus-based decisions. Data is unavailable.

Insufficient data.

The criticism is aimed squarely at Russia's aggression, which is seen as the root cause of the shift in the security environment. No domestic opponents or political groups are identified or criticized.