By Plenary Sessions: Mart Maastik

The primary opposition is aimed at scientists and presenters who stress the anthropogenic nature of climate change, as well as the CO2 quota system. The criticism is intense and politically driven, accusing opponents of economic destruction and hypocrisy. A professor who focused too heavily on "scaremongering" is especially criticized, and it is alleged that the opponents do not grasp the subject matter (they don't know the CO2 concentration).

The criticism is directed against the coalition and the government, accusing them of political horse-trading, arbitrarily shuffling agencies around to suit partisan interests, and squandering money (e.g., 2 million for renaming a ministry). Separately, the Social Democrats and the Centre Party are criticized for vote-grubbing and making questionable personnel selections (such as abolishing the legal education requirement for the State Secretary).

The primary opposition is directed at the amendment proposals submitted by the Ministry of Regional Affairs and Agriculture, which have been "grafted" onto the draft bill, as well as the Prime Minister's promises regarding the shortening of procedures. The criticism is policy- and procedure-focused, emphasizing the undermining of citizens' rights.

The primary confrontation is aimed at the government led by the Prime Minister and the Reform Party, criticizing both their economic policy and procedural missteps. The criticism is intense, specifically accusing the government of failing to involve business owners and lacking any clear mandate for the tax hikes. The government's actions are being labeled cynical and utterly shameless.

The main criticism is aimed at the government and the coalition, accusing them of incompetent leadership, short-sighted tax policy, and the confusing implementation of activity-based budgeting. The criticism is intense, focusing heavily on both policy and procedure, and accuses the government of destroying the Estonian economy with a "tax festival." Specifically criticized are the claims made by Maris Lauri and the Prime Minister's promises of a "pink future."

The criticism is aimed at the procedural ambiguity surrounding the conduct of the session, rather than at a specific political opponent. It is stressed that the registration of questions ("nimble fingers") may not comply with the rules, and this is directed against the actions of the presiding officer.

The main criticism is aimed at the government, particularly the Reform Party, which is accused of reshuffling administrative areas based on partisan interests. The opposition is intense, accusing the government of pursuing hidden political agendas (such as preparing for phosphorite mining) by placing the Geological Survey under the Ministry of Climate. The criticism is primarily policy-based and procedural (concerning costs and illogicality).

The criticism targets the current tax policy, which is viewed as overly burdensome and forces people to hold multiple jobs. In the socio-political debate, he/she challenges the stance of "Good Varro" regarding the elimination of state funding for abortions, arguing that this simplifies the issue at the expense of exceptional cases.

The speaker defends the role of the opposition and its right to ask questions that demand answers. The primary opponent is the rapporteur, who is criticized for accusing the opposition and for violating procedural rules within the committee. The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural deficiencies.

The main opponent is the prime minister and the government's policy, which is sharply criticized for promoting unnecessary and costly offshore wind farms. The criticism is policy- and value-based, focusing on economic risks (high prices) and security risks.

The primary opposition is directed at the government and the prime minister, who are being criticized for setting misplaced priorities, specifically prioritizing climate goals over economic growth. The criticism is both political and performance-based, accusing the government of killing off rural areas and failing to deliver on promises to cut red tape. The government is also accused of the Stakhanovite over-fulfillment of European Union directives.

Criticism is aimed at the government's centralizing policies and austerity measures, which are deemed a "very short-sighted decision." Although the speaker begins mildly, stating that they do not believe the minister has bad intentions, they are intensely critical of the policy's failure to consider the regional dimension. There is also opposition to the fiscal policy, which plans tax hikes despite previous negative experience.