By Plenary Sessions: Helmen Kütt

There is no direct opposition or criticism aimed at specific political opponents. The criticism is instead directed at the current performance of the judicial system, particularly concerning speed and accessibility.

The main opposition is directed at the actions of the Prime Minister and the government, criticizing both the delay in responding to the parliamentary inquiry and the disregard for the social consequences of the draft bill. The criticism is policy-driven, focusing on the deficiencies of the legislation and the failure to mitigate social risks (specifically, the financing of addiction treatment).

The criticism is aimed at the government's political decisions (the minimal increase in benefits) and procedural errors, such as failing to involve the city of Tartu in the prison matter. The speaker also criticizes the rapporteur for resorting to labeling and moralizing, demanding that the chair maintain order and correctness. The criticism is fundamentally policy- and procedure-based, not personal, and centers on highlighting unjust outcomes.

The primary opposition is aimed at the government’s budget priorities, sharply criticizing a tax break exceeding 100 million euros for high earners (those making 4000+ euros). The political decision to leave urgent social issues unresolved is being criticized, specifically the funding of subsistence benefits and special needs care. The criticism is policy-driven and intense.

The primary opposition is directed at the government/minister, sharply criticizing the sequence of decision-making and the lack of transparency regarding classified documents. The criticism is both procedural and political, calling into question the government's ability to assess risks (the repatriation of prisoners, major threats). The opposition is intense and expresses deep concern.

Strong criticism directed at the government's and coalition's budget priorities, especially concerning the abolition of the tax hump, which offers tax gifts worth over 100 million euros to high earners (those making 4000+ euros). It criticizes the government for taking out loans to distribute subsidies to the wealthy, while crises in the social sector (special welfare services, the subsistence minimum) remain unresolved. It criticizes the Minister of Social Affairs for presenting plans that fail to address immediate problems.