By Plenary Sessions: Mart Maastik

The primary criticism is aimed at the European Union’s ill-conceived funding decisions and previous Estonian governments and members of the Riigikogu who failed to sufficiently analyze the project’s feasibility. The criticism is intense and focuses on political indecisiveness and procedural errors, particularly the failure to push back against "rather foolish directives." Also under fire is the country’s lack of funds, which necessitates using CO2 money for the construction of Rail Baltic.

Opposition is aimed at the bill's proponents, whose claims regarding the lack of bureaucracy and free collection are deemed unrealistic. The criticism is policy-driven, demanding greater financial transparency and proper cost accounting, particularly concerning the burden placed on the consumer.

The confrontation is aimed directly at the prime minister and the government, who stand accused of causing political chaos, engaging in obfuscation, and creating uncertainty. The criticism is intense and addresses both specific policy decisions (the car tax, family benefits) and the government's overall trustworthiness, with critics claiming that the government's actions undermine the credibility of the entire country. The opponents are also accused of failing to heed earlier warnings.

The criticism is directed at the security deficiencies of the e-voting system and regulatory shortcomings. The resistance is procedural and political, calling for the system to be made safer, but direct opponents are not criticized personally.

The main adversary is the minister, who is sharply criticized for decisions made while serving as the head of the Health Insurance Fund council. The criticism is performance-based and procedural, accusing the minister of financial irresponsibility and "wasteful spending" at a time when the Health Insurance Fund's situation is catastrophic. The attacks are intense and focus on personal accountability for the inappropriate use of public funds.

The speaker is taking an opposition stance toward the government or the responsible minister, sharply criticizing the priorities set for the defense and border strategy. The criticism is policy- and performance-based, focusing on security shortcomings and ineffective solutions (such as digging ditches).

The criticism is directed straight at the Government of the Republic and the coalition parties (the Reform Party, Estonia 200), accusing them of breaking election promises and pursuing foolish policies (the car tax). The criticism is primarily policy-based (tax hikes, weakening energy security) and procedural (failure to receive answers, wasting time), demanding the withdrawal of the draft legislation and a proper debate.