By Plenary Sessions: Lauri Laats

The most significant opposing parties are the coalition members and the coalition’s policies, which the genuine critics of the speeches are attempting to halt. Key points include: rushing the draft bill and the absence of an impact analysis; criticism regarding the risks of damaging democracy and citizenship rights; it is emphasized that the state must not punish the populace based on demographics or passports. The intensity is strong, and opportunities for compromise remain regrettably scarce.

A strong opposition stance against the coalition and the government. It criticizes the rushed implementation of tax hikes, the lack of transparency in processing draft legislation, and the failure to consult with interest groups. It focuses on protecting pensioners and vulnerable groups, and stresses that the coalition lacks a mandate and that the opposition must remain strong.

The specific position of the political opposition cannot be firmly determined; there are no references to opposing parties or groups. The criticism is focused on the problem of the abuse of norms and how implementation should be carried out and oversight strengthened, rather than characterizing a specific political rivalry.

Substantial criticism has been leveled at the coalition and the government; the main points of attack concern budget transparency, the lack of structure and long-term vision in the core budget, and inadequate coordination of tax policy. The reports reveal strong political opposition and a readiness to curb the coalition's initiatives through alternative bills and motions to discontinue proceedings.

They oppose the increase in notary fees and the hike in VAT. There is strong criticism directed at the government's decision-making process, coupled with a demand to halt the draft legislation and involve the cabinet in the discussion.

Criticizes the current government and coalition; uses presentations to demonstrate that the government’s economic policy fails to support people’s purchasing power and the economy; highlights that the opposition and the Centre Party offer alternatives (such as lowering the VAT); stresses that the coalition does not support all of their proposals; and maintains an oppositional stance only on political and procedural matters.

A critical assessment aimed at the coalition and the Ministry of Finance; the focus is on non-transparent handling or avoiding scrutiny, coupled with blaming officials for errors. The intensity is high, yet compromise is being rejected, or concrete proposals for cooperation have not been directly presented.

The primary adversary is the government and its economic and energy policies. Criticisms focus on the lack of budget transparency and the inadequacy of support measures; economic uncertainty is deepening alongside rising food prices. There is strong technical criticism regarding insufficient planning and investment in energy policy, emphasizing the necessity of ensuring energy security in cooperation with state-owned companies.

The criticism is directed at the government's and ministries' current practices regarding the use of funds and their failure to fulfill promises. The speaker demands accountability and clear reporting in light of the work done by the National Audit Office; the critical tone suggests an emphasis on opposition oversight and the enforcement of obligations.

The legislative and political response is being driven by the intense criticism aimed at the government and the ruling coalition. This criticism focuses on regional development, tax policy, and the disappearance of services; accusations of failing to deliver on promises and the nature of the decisions implemented clearly align with the opposition’s narrative.