By Plenary Sessions: Siim Pohlak

The opponents are those who propagate climate panic and fear-mongering, as well as those who refuse to present specific numerical data regarding the impact of human activity. The criticism is intense, accusing the opposing side of ripping facts out of context and causing damage to both the economy and mental health. No willingness to compromise is being expressed; instead, a complete change of direction is being demanded.

The main opponent is the ruling coalition, which is being criticized for playing political games and avoiding the substantive involvement of the opposition. The criticism is intense, accusing the government of lacking statesmanship and compromising national dignity. The government's actions are described as "steamrolling ahead."

The primary confrontation is directed at Kaja Kallas's government and the subsequent continuation government, who are criticized for mismanaging priorities and wasting taxpayer money. The criticism is intense and addresses both the inefficiency of the government’s operations and the inaccuracy of the facts presented, particularly concerning the forecasts for cost reduction.

The speaker makes an indirect reference to "critics" who have previously opposed the addition of public holidays, citing potential economic losses. No direct confrontation with the presenter or other political groups is voiced; rather, the critics' stance serves as background context for the question being posed.

The primary adversary is the ruling coalition, which is being criticized both for procedural obstruction and for the failure of the Rail Baltic project. The criticism is intense, accusing the coalition of avoiding discussion, as EKRE’s proposals were shot down in the Finance Committee specifically to prevent them from reaching the plenary session. The speaker suspects that personal profit expectations are behind the effort to keep the project alive.

The main opponents are the parties of the ruling coalition: the Reform Party, the Social Democrats, and Eesti 200. The criticism is aimed both at the policy itself (the unfairness and inefficiency of the car tax) and the procedure, accusing the opposing side of suppressing debate and avoiding public discussion. The speaker accuses the governing parties of indifference toward rural residents and rural life.

There is no direct opposition, but criticism is aimed at the government’s inaction or its insufficient overview regarding the movement of migrant masses. The emphasis is placed on the necessity of improving policy and effectiveness, with specific requests for the minister to provide concrete plans.