By Plenary Sessions: Helmen Kütt

The opposition is aimed at the claim made by the bill's supporters regarding the instability of electoral alliances, demanding research to substantiate this claim. Criticism is also leveled at the rapporteur, who fails to see the contradiction in the bill—a contradiction highlighted by the speaker—concerning the opportunities for individuals not belonging to a political party to participate in the discussion.

No adversarial position was taken; the speaker focused on supporting the draft bill, highlighting its positive impact, and ensuring its constructive processing. Instead of criticism, the focus was rather on seeking clarification (specifically regarding the definition of a severe condition).

The criticism is aimed at the deficiencies in implementing inclusive education and the lack of necessary analyses, rather than targeting a specific political opponent. The intensity of the criticism is moderate, focusing primarily on the system's inefficiency and the negative consequences this has for children's mental health.