By Plenary Sessions: Mart Maastik

Insufficient data.

The main opponent is the Prime Minister and the government, whose energy policy is sharply criticized for being ideological, wasteful, and inefficient. The criticism is policy-based, focusing directly on the figures presented by the government and the cost of the proposed solutions, and is intense, accusing the government of favoring irrational and security-threatening solutions. There is no sign of willingness to compromise; instead, a revision of the existing plans is demanded.

The opposition is aimed at politicians who vote against their own convictions or support voting rights for non-citizens, thereby calling into question their courage and priorities. The criticism is policy- and value-based, accusing the opposing side of failing to be masters in their own land and instead talking about the oppressed "citizens of aggressor states."

The main opponents are the government coalition as a whole, especially the Reform Party (for changing sports funding) and Eesti 200 (for setting priorities, citing Minister Kallas's trip as an example). The criticism is directed at political decisions (cuts, taxes) and procedural issues (the timing of the debate, the minister's actions during the strike). The speaker demands that the government justify its decisions, which points to the intensity of the uncompromising criticism.

There is no direct opposition or criticism aimed at political opponents. Questions are directed at the Minister of Defense to clarify the specifics and cost of the government’s plans, which indicates the execution of an oversight function rather than direct confrontation.

The main adversaries are the Prime Minister and the Minister of Finance, who are criticized for political decisions (subsidizing expensive offshore wind parks) and for creating unequal competition. The criticism is intense and accusatory, particularly concerning the lack of justification for tax hikes and national defense funding. The speaker faults the ministers for evading questions and presenting inaccurate data.

The primary opposition is directed against the policies and assertions of the government (the minister), particularly regarding the funding of the education pact and the viability of wind energy. The Isamaa party is being defended against the minister's accusations, with emphasis placed on the fact that the agreement was not confirmed due to inadequate financial guarantees from the state. The criticism targets the substance and procedures of the policy, rather than individuals.

Fierce resistance is directed at those who made energy policy decisions in secret, without providing calculations or justification. The criticism is intense, focusing on procedural failure and the use of subsidies, which has been branded as "very wrong policy."

The primary confrontation is aimed at the Prime Minister and the government’s energy policy. The criticism is political and economic in nature, centering on the unnecessary planning of expensive, subsidized projects (offshore wind, nuclear power plants), given the existing onshore potential. The intensity of the opposition is strong because the government's claims regarding cheap energy are being directly challenged.

The main criticism is directed at the European Union's leadership and their energy policy, which is unsustainable and pursues mystical climate goals. The critique is policy-based, emphasizing its economic damage and self-destructive nature, which is leading Europe toward collapse.

The confrontation is aimed directly at the prime minister and the government, calling into question the data they presented (26% income tax) and the results of their economic policy (economic recession). The criticism is policy- and data-driven, demanding explanations regarding the specifics of the tax system.