By Plenary Sessions: Vladimir Arhipov

There is insufficient data to determine the opposition's stance.

They adopt a critical stance regarding the government or the Ministry of Defence, demanding clarity and transparency concerning security operations. The criticism is not directed at individuals, but rather demands institutional accountability and further explanations.

Directs sharp criticism at the Reform Party government and the minister, accusing them of deceiving the public regarding the issue of tax hikes. They criticize both the policy itself (the tax hikes) and the behavior displayed (fudging the truth, outright lying). There are no signs of seeking a compromise; quite the opposite—they are leveling increasingly harsh accusations.

There is no direct hostility expressed; rather, constructive criticism is offered regarding the Rail Baltic project, along with inquiries about alternative solutions. The critique is primarily practical, focusing on technical vulnerabilities instead of ideological disagreements.

The text criticizes the ENIC/NARIC decision to cease the recognition of diplomas, considering it both unjust and practically detrimental. It highlights a discrepancy between the Ministry of Education's demands and the actual capacity for providing available specialists.

Sharp criticism is aimed at the "radical politicians" and "militant politicians" who support the law on churches and congregations. The State Chancellery's symbolism advisor is also criticized in connection with the reform of religious holidays. Opponents are compared to the Soviet regime, using strong rhetoric such as "empty posturers."

No direct opposition stance is being expressed; the question is directed to the minister with the aim of finding a constructive solution. The criticism is aimed more at the situation itself than at specific individuals or political parties.

The speaker is criticizing the government in two key areas: education funding and energy policy. The opposition has taken a principled stand, accusing the government of lacking a mandate and adopting an ideological approach. The criticism is policy-focused, not personal, centering on the democratic legitimacy of the decisions and their socio-economic consequences.

He/She sharply criticizes the coalition of the Reform Party and Eesti 200, accusing them of neglecting the social sector and of removing the lone pensioner's benefit (a measure implemented by the previous coalition). The opposition is principled and policy-centered, focusing on criticizing the government's priorities and decisions. It demands concrete answers and action plans.

There is not enough data.

Sharp criticism of the government and its members, accusing them of lying and implementing unfair tax policies. The Social Democratic Party was singled out for particular criticism regarding the unemployment insurance reform. [The speaker/group] warns against lying becoming a "political norm" and highlights the dangers this poses to democracy. Cooperation is not ruled out, but clear answers and transparency are demanded.

Directs sharp criticism at the parties of the previous government, specifically emphasizing the role of the Social Democratic Party in the recent tax hikes. It specifically criticizes the raising of general taxes, excise duties, and the VAT on food. The opposition remains policy-focused, not personal, concentrating solely on specific policy measures.

The criticism is aimed directly at the government and the minister, demanding accountability for the worsening plight of pensioners. The critique is policy-focused, not personal, concentrating instead on the failure of the system.

Sharply criticizes the current government and ministers, specifically for their excessive focus on analysis and the lack of practical solutions. It accuses the government of failing in regional policy and allowing the deterioration of service accessibility in rural areas. At the same time, it offers constructive cooperation, calling on the government to accept the Center Party's assistance, a move that demonstrates pragmatic opposition.