By Plenary Sessions: Andres Metsoja

The opposition is aimed at questions voiced in the Riigikogu chamber, which accuse the Estonian state concerning the issue of citizenship, labeling the situation as infuriating. During the second debate, the bill's proponents were criticized for providing an incomplete analysis and for introducing the regulation (the ban on the ODEX method) in an unclear manner that increases overall costs.

The main criticism is directed against the bill initiated by the Government of the Republic, citing duplicity and insufficient impact analysis. It criticizes those who use the argument of reducing administrative burden as a "smokescreen" to avoid substantive discussion regarding the prohibition of drilling methods and the related costs. Furthermore, the state's inconsistent attitude toward local governments is criticized (specifically, concerning land tax versus the right to decide on mining operations).

The primary criticism targets the ruling coalition, citing misplaced priorities (preferring cultural infrastructure over road maintenance) and a failure to address the inequities of the energy market. As a result of the government's policies, road infrastructure has been relegated to the "role of the stepchild." The criticism is policy- and results-based, demanding a complete reassessment of priorities.

Criticism is directed against plans for the centralization of regional administration, which are linked to the ideas of either the current government or the "previous coalition." The opposition is political and strategic, questioning the foundation and purpose of the plans while highlighting local resistance.