By Plenary Sessions: Vladimir Arhipov

He sharply criticizes the government's slow pace of action and its bureaucratic approach. He is particularly critical of the Ministry of Social Affairs regarding the issue of the minimum subsistence level and, generally, the delays caused by various government agencies. He expresses dissatisfaction with the commissions' decisions to reject important draft legislation.

He directs sharp criticism at the Minister of the Interior and the government as a whole regarding immigration policy. The criticism targets political decisions, not individuals, focusing instead on the policy's fundamental contradiction concerning the protection of local interests. He rules out the possibility of compromise, stating that 4,000 foreign workers are acceptable only as a temporary measure.

The Speaker sharply criticized the government's policy, accusing it of implementing tax hikes and providing inadequate technical solutions. He expressed deep skepticism regarding the ministers' claims, demanding concrete evidence to back up their assertions. The criticism remains primarily policy-focused, rather than personal, concentrating on the deficiencies in systems and decision-making.

The text launches sharp criticism against the government, accusing officials of "hypocrisy" and "bullying." It directly criticizes the government's tax policy and its attempts to restrict religious freedom. The speaker uses strong language, such as claiming the government is "steamrolling over [the opposition/the people]," and warns against opening "Pandora's box," signaling an uncompromising stance of opposition.

The criticism is directed squarely at the government, particularly regarding tax increases and green transition measures. The critique is policy-focused, not personal, concentrating instead on specific decisions and their economic consequences.

Criticizes the decisions of the Economic Affairs Committee and the government's policy regarding local municipalities. The opposition is focused more on policy than on personal attacks, concentrating on systemic issues in the relationship between the state and local governments.

He/She sharply criticizes the current education system, labeling it an inefficient use of taxpayer money. He/She expresses opposition to the government's immigration policy, particularly the increase in quotas. The criticism is systemic and policy-focused, not personal.

It criticizes the government directly, accusing them of underestimating the potential of Estonian workers. The opposition is politically focused, concentrating on the government’s failure to resolve employment issues. The intensity of the criticism is moderate, but clearly articulated.

It adopts a clearly oppositional stance toward the government and its ministers, criticizing their fiscal and energy policies. Minister Ligi is criticized by name specifically regarding public transport funding issues. The attacks are primarily policy-focused, centering on the government's inconsistency and irresponsibility. It shows no willingness to compromise, instead demanding clear answers and changes.