By Plenary Sessions: Vladimir Arhipov

He sharply criticizes the bill's proponents, accusing them of political manipulation and attempting to eliminate their competitors. He asserts that the opposition is confusing the significance of local and national elections. He warns specifically against the creation of a "fifth column" and faults the opponents for their lack of statesmanship.

The government is criticized for its passivity in maintaining the monuments of the War of Independence. The criticism is primarily policy-based, focusing on the government's priorities and funding decisions. The tone is demanding, but not personally aggressive.

The speaker refers to the "ideological orientation of the green transition," which may suggest a critical attitude toward extreme green policy approaches. However, this is not a direct attack, but rather a question of finding a balanced approach.

The speaker does not express direct opposition, but instead asks clarifying questions regarding the presenter's proposal, focusing on identifying practical problems.

Expresses strong criticism of the current government, accusing it of implementing tax increases, demonstrating indecisiveness, and avoiding responsibility. Specific points of critique include the failure of Nordica, soaring electricity prices, and the sluggish pace of increasing subsistence benefits. The opposition is principled and encompasses both political and procedural dimensions.

It clearly adopts an opposition stance toward the government, criticizing economic policy and the offshore wind farm project. The criticism is primarily policy-focused, concentrating on specific decisions and their impacts. It expresses direct dissatisfaction with the minister's responses, but maintains the boundaries of politeness.

Levels direct criticism at the Prime Minister and the government, accusing them of excessive deliberation and slow decision-making. The government's approach is criticized as fruitless bureaucracy ("you create committees, you debate, you hold consultations").

Due to the scarcity of data, it is not possible to analyze the oppositional stance.

It does not express direct criticism, but rather supports the government's tax policy changes. The questions are aimed at obtaining clarification, not at launching attacks or expressing opposition.

The text indirectly criticizes Nordica's management and expresses skepticism about the handling of major state projects in general. The critique is constructive and systemic, rather than personal, focusing on management issues as a systemic question.