By Plenary Sessions: Lauri Laats

The main conflict centers on the methods used by the coalition and the Reform Party-biased elite, which are accused of a lack of transparency and cabinet secrecy. Criticism is being raised regarding the forms and manner of budget processing, and a weak motion of no confidence against Jürgen Ligi is being considered, although the primary goal is not a personal attack, but rather the improvement of the budget and procedures. What is desired is a greater culture of accountability and decision-making that is understandable to the public.

Expresses a critical stance toward the coalition's decisions and the ministers' conduct; emphasizes accountability and oversight. In the second speech, reference is made to filing a motion of no confidence as an element of opposition tactics, but it is stressed that the matter concerns the actual facts, not political maneuvering.

A critic addresses the tax policy of the current government: he stresses the damage caused by raising consumption taxes for low-income earners and justifies the necessity of implementing a bank tax. A former or potential opposition member accuses the coalition of passing detrimental legislation and points out that certain opposition factions (EKRE, Social Democrats) supported the bank tax bill, even though their overall conduct is considered somewhat unpredictable. The intensity is high: he emphasizes the need for resistance and a solidary approach, specifically to prevent any further increase in consumption taxes.

The style is critical regarding the governance of the government and the Riigikogu (Parliament); it emphasizes the crisis of democracy and the lack of public trust in the Riigikogu, stressing the need for decision-makers to provide both a clear plan and concrete answers. The stance is also critical concerning tax policy, raising questions and proposing alternative solutions, suggesting that current decisions are either unacceptable or are failing to perform as anticipated.

Criticism is leveled at the government and the ruling coalition regarding tax policy. The argument is being pushed that the consumption tax will increase the cost of living and damage the economy, and an alternative (a bank tax) is proposed. Insulting remarks are directed at the government's caliber and their alleged lies, all while stressing the urgent need for honest and responsible policy.

The critique is sharply aimed at the coalition and its tax policy, accusing them of poor planning and failing to adhere to their ideological line. The speaker stresses the importance of responsibility, encourages them to stand firm on their ideology, and suggests withdrawing from the government if the desired reforms cannot be implemented.

The primary source of contention: The Estonian Centre Party faction. Criticism centers on the lack of transparency in the tax policy and its effect on residents of rural areas; it is emphasized that the goal is not to restrict consumption but rather to secure greater revenue for the state; they demand the rejection of the draft bill and greater parliamentary transparency.

A high-level objection to the government's draft bill; it criticizes the rushed process, insufficient analysis, and the complete lack of a socio-economic impact assessment. It calls for the rejection of the draft bill and stresses that the measure affects a significant portion of the population (children, parents, pensioners). The intensity of the objection is high, framed both politically and ethically.

Efforts are underway to critically assess the actions of the government and ministers, especially Piret Hartman's presentation, where no solutions were offered and the need for a vision was emphasized. The criticisms focus primarily on the political and strategic direction and the distribution of infrastructure support funds, rather than being personal.

A critical stance regarding Telia's profit and investment strategies, and a general demand for greater transparency concerning investments and the use of capital. The issue of investment reinvestment is being raised, but no specific opposition group or political antagonism is mentioned.