By Plenary Sessions: Reili Rand

The main opponents are conservative factions, whose questions are deemed frivolous and ironic, particularly regarding the ridicule of the topic of 150 different genders. The criticism is aimed at substantively invalidating the opponents' arguments, refuting claims regarding the creation of bureaucracy and the convention's obsolescence. No willingness to compromise with the opponents is expressed; instead, a serious debate is demanded of them.

The main criticism is directed at the government and the prime minister, especially the ministers from the Reform Party or Eesti 200 who oversaw the labor sector. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, focusing on the delay in solving the wage gap problem and questioning the government's motives. The speaker is confrontational, challenging the prime minister's response and demanding a clear message to Estonian women.

There is no direct opposition, but the speaker casts doubt on the Minister of Culture’s existing vision and priorities, fearing that smaller communities will be marginalized in national policy. The critique is policy-driven and focuses on the lack of state contribution.

The main confrontation is with Isamaa, who is being demanded to provide a concrete plan for ensuring energy supply security. Isamaa’s political direction is sharply criticized, with suggestions that it is steering the country’s development toward that of former Eastern Bloc nations. The Reform Party is mentioned in relation to previous coalition dynamics, where they were held hostage by the Social Democrats.

The opposition is aimed at the government coalition's policy concerning healthcare funding, the objective of which is to bring in private capital. The criticism is rooted in both the policy itself and its potential consequences, highlighting the threat posed to the solidarity-based system and the resulting increase in inequality.

The confrontation is aimed at the conservative parties (EKRE, Isamaa, Keskerakond) and their colleagues, who stand accused of ignorance, confusing facts, and adopting a "crude approach" to gender issues. The criticism is intense, addressing both political narrow-mindedness and the reproduction of stereotypes that hinder systemic change.