By Plenary Sessions: Tõnis Lukas

The main criticism is aimed at the Ministry of Economic Affairs and Communications for drawing up a tourism development plan that disregards culture, and more broadly, at the government for treating culture as secondary. The criticism is both procedural and political, highlighting that the Ministry of Culture’s proposals are requested far too late. The speaker finds the failure of other ministries to value culture to be "stunning."

The primary confrontation is with the Ministry of Education and Research, which is being sharply criticized for rejecting the Isamaa amendment proposal and branding it as discriminatory. The criticism is intense, accusing the ministry of engaging in activities that "discriminate against Estonians" and of twisting the constitution. The speaker clearly declares that due to the ministry's position, they are unable to support the draft Basic Education Act.

The criticism is aimed at the coalition partners, particularly the Social Democrats (Socs), whose proposed changes to electoral procedures (pre-registration, loyalty checks) are being treated with irony and viewed as unreliable. Aggressively acting states (Russia, Belarus) are also sharply criticized for their interference and hostile behavior directed against the Estonian electoral process.

The criticism is aimed at officials of the Ministry of Education and Research (HTM), who are accused of concealing the true situation from the minister and unrealistically relying on internal reserves. The objection is both financial and procedural, as the law places vocational schools at legal risk regarding student admissions. The speaker also criticizes the deficiencies of the education agreement concerning the financing of vocational education.