By Plenary Sessions: Irja Lutsar

The criticism is implicitly aimed at the government's inaction or inefficiency in resolving the economic crisis and building public trust. The opposition is not personal; rather, it focuses on the government's failure to involve independent experts and explain its decisions to the public.

The main opponents are those who are skeptical about lowering the voting age, such as Jaak Valge, whose arguments he directly refutes. The sharpest opposition is expressed by accusing Urmas Reinsalu of populism, posing a direct rhetorical question to him. He also refutes the general negative arguments concerning the susceptibility of young people and their lack of life experience.

There is no direct political confrontation, but criticism is aimed at the existing measures, which focus solely on financial contributions (family benefits), and the prevailing societal attitude that views the elderly as a burden. They also oppose the ideology that deems a small family fashionable, and the pressure placed upon young women.

The criticism is aimed primarily at the lack of analytical depth in the presented report and the illogical nature of the general economic situation, rather than specific political opponents or groups.

There isn't enough data.