By Plenary Sessions: Evelin Poolamets

The main opponent is the government and the Reform Party, who are being criticized both for current inaction (failure to close the control line) and for their historical political direction (visa freedom with Russia). The criticism is intense and calls into question the government’s credibility and its ability to change course. The opponent’s actions are judged to be unreliable and inconsistent with Estonian values.

The speaker adopts a clear oppositional role, criticizing the government and ministers for their incompetence and failure to grasp the seriousness of the security incident. A particularly sharp accusation is leveled, stating that "random luck cannot be the foundation of security policy." Furthermore, the legitimacy of the government's actions regarding military decisions is called into question.

The criticism is aimed at the administrators and defenders of the e-voting system, faulting them for trying to boost its credibility with PR campaigns instead of addressing the system's actual technical shortcomings.

The primary criticism is leveled against the Ministry of Finance and the Government of the Republic, citing systemic violations in budget execution and incompetence in the drafting of legislation. The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural errors, such as the misuse of reserves, the improper transfer of balances, and the blurring of fiscal year boundaries.

The main opponent is the minister, who is being criticized on a personal level (labeled an "adventurer"), and the government, which is accused of taking a calculated risk. The criticism is intense, addressing both substantive irregularities (like the rise in crime) and procedural flaws (such as missing documentation). Rather than showing a willingness to compromise, the demand is for the legislative process to be withdrawn and terminated immediately.