By Plenary Sessions: Vladimir Arhipov

The opposition is aimed at the bill’s initiators (Isamaa is specifically named) and the government. They are accused of prioritizing political slogans and deliberately ignoring local residents (the Setos, people from the Petseri area). The criticism is intense, focusing on both procedural failures (specifically, a lack of inclusion/engagement) and strategic shortcomings. The opponents are further criticized for punishing Estonian citizens simply because of where they live.

The opposition is aimed at those who advocate for the continuation of e-voting, particularly due to its failure to guarantee ballot secrecy. The criticism is political in nature, focusing on the violation of democratic principles.

The main criticism is aimed at the government, which is accused of "blowing the budget" and imposing an unnecessary tax. The criticism is policy-based (the tax fails to meet its objective) and procedural (the government is unable to show trust in its own people). A compromise (adjusting the tax) is categorically rejected, with demands for a full repeal.

The primary opposition is aimed at the care reform implemented by the government and the minister responsible for it. Criticism targets the policy design, which allowed service providers—that is, companies—to reap "very good profits" from the reform at the expense of the public sector and the taxpayer. The opposition is policy-driven and results-oriented.

The confrontation targets the bill's sponsor and its content, criticizing its inherent dangers and the fact that it is being presented under false pretenses. The criticism is politically substantive, specifically questioning the sufficiency of the mechanisms used to assess the dangerousness of inmates.

The opposition is directed against the inaction and bureaucratic delays by the government and the former Minister of Social Affairs, particularly concerning the raising of the subsistence level. The 200-euro limit is sharply criticized as disgraceful, and the establishment of a commission—whose findings will only be released in the spring of 2026—is condemned. Attempts to remove the topic of pensioner assistance from the agenda are also facing criticism.