By Plenary Sessions: Anti Poolamets

The confrontation is intense and aimed squarely at the ruling coalition. Eesti 200 is facing particular criticism for having completely forfeited public trust, with calls for them to step down from the government. The criticism is grounded in both ethical concerns (e.g., election manipulation, corruption) and political issues (tax hikes, lack of a clear mandate). The government stands accused of hiding behind national security issues while simultaneously destroying the economy.

The main criticism is aimed directly at the government (addressed as "you"), accusing them of economic failure and prioritizing cheap labor. The opposition is particularly fierce regarding the Green Transition regulations, which are viewed as totalitarian and responsible for shutting down businesses. The criticism is policy-driven and intense, highlighting the inconsistencies in the government's actions.

The main opponents are the government coalition and its members, particularly the party of Liina Kersna and Johanna-Maria Lehtme. The criticism is intense and ranges from political (lack of mandate) to ethical and personal (fraud, handling matters deceitfully, squandering 3 million euros). Compromise is ruled out, as the government's resignation is being demanded.

The main opponents are the forces promoting the ideology of quotas and the green transition (the government/EU), who are accused of socialist delusions and encroaching upon the business sector. The criticism is intense and ideological, asserting that the opponents' activities are dishonest and unjust. Furthermore, the undignified behavior of the former prime minister on a plane is being criticized, with the opponent being accused of covering it up.

The criticism targets the management and policies within the energy sector, which have resulted in chronic underinvestment and the deterioration of the system. This criticism is grounded in both policy failures and measurable performance, highlighting the current system's inability to execute its mandate, and directly citing the statements made by the CEO of Eesti Energia as supporting evidence.

The main opponents are the government (especially the Minister of Education and Research), Brussels, and LGBT organizations/gender propagandists. The criticism is intense and ideological, accusing the government of hijacking tax law and introducing "toxic trans ideology." There is no willingness to compromise, with demands that the government address the real concerns of the voters.

The main targets of the criticism are the Ministry of Justice, the Prosecutor's Office (naming prosecutor Arik Lepp), and the ruling party (referencing Kaja Kallas's first government and the actions of the minister/former party chairman). The criticism is intense and focuses on ethical responsibility, failed investigations, and unprofessionalism. He/She also sharply criticizes the lack of accountability as a systemic problem.

The speaker sharply criticizes the proponents of intermittent power, accusing them of ignoring the laws of nature and suffering from ideological blindness (a comparison is drawn to Lysenko). The criticism is primarily political and fact-based, focusing on grid instability and the economic inefficiency of wind farms. He calls on his opponents to "come out of hiding" and engage in debate, but remains uncompromising in his own positions.

Fierce opposition is aimed at the former governing coalitions, specifically targeting the EKREIKE era and the Ratas administration, as well as the US political model (the Trump administration). The criticism is intense and highly personalized, accusing them of dismantling democracy and degrading the quality of the Riigikogu (Estonian Parliament). Opponents are directly branded as incompetent ("sheep").

The main opponents are "Brussels officials," who are accused of creating bureaucracy to justify their own existence, and the government, which implements EU mandates. The criticism is ideological, accusing the opponents of establishing ideological control over the economy. The opposition is intense and uncompromising, labeling the law the "snitching law" and linking it to historical repression.