By Plenary Sessions: Vadim Belobrovtsev

The main opponents are the government coalition as a whole and its leaders, especially the Minister of Climate and the Prime Minister. Criticism is aimed both at the policy itself (tax increases) and at procedural activities (lack of transparency, "troika" decisions, steamrolling). The attacks are intense, and compromise is ruled out, with demands for the minister's resignation and explanations from the prime minister.

The primary criticism is aimed at the management of Tallinn Airport for incompetence and a 70% hike in fees, which runs contrary to European trends. The Estonian government is also being criticized for its inaction and its failure to ensure national connectivity. The criticism is intense and demands government intervention.

The primary opponents are coalition politicians and the bill's initiators, who face criticism regarding both the policy itself (the violation of fundamental rights) and their underlying motives (influencing elections, cynicism). The speaker accuses the opponents of collectively punishing law-abiding residents and, through their actions, posing a greater security threat to the state.

The main criticism is directed at the current government (Reform Party, Estonia 200) and the Tallinn city authorities. This criticism is policy- and performance-based, accusing them of inaction, budget cuts (specifically affecting extracurricular education), and halting crucial sports infrastructure projects (such as the Olympic swimming pool and football halls). The Minister of Education’s decision to reduce funding for extracurricular activities is also being heavily criticized.

The primary opponent is the government coalition and the Minister of the Interior, who are being criticized for demagoguery, poor legislation, and the crude use of their parliamentary majority. The criticism is intense and multi-faceted, covering both the political (polarization) and the procedural (lack of impact analysis) levels, and accuses the government of implementing collective responsibility.

The criticism is directed at the government’s (or the Prime Minister’s) inaction or lack of clarity in defining the foreign policy direction, particularly concerning Estonia’s absence of a role in great power negotiations. The criticism is policy-based and moderate in intensity, raising questions aimed at achieving strategic clarity.

The primary criticism targets the stances taken by Prime Minister Kristen Michal and the government concerning banking taxation, raising doubts about the veracity and adequacy of their arguments. The opposition is rooted in both policy and substance, centering on a comparison of these taxes with those in neighboring countries.

The main opponent is the Minister of Education and the government, who are being criticized for the failure of the Education Agreement, which neither resulted in the promised collective agreement nor resolved the teachers' concerns. The criticism is intense and politically charged, accusing the government of losing the trust of local municipalities and demanding the minister's resignation. The speaker rejects the minister's claim that the failure of the Education Agreement was due to political sabotage.

The main targets of criticism are right-wing parties, who are accused of gaining a political double benefit by influencing election results and appealing to voters. Furthermore, the Social Democrats are being criticized for changing their position, which contradicts their earlier stance. The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural violations and the undermining of democratic principles.

The main opponent is the prime minister and the governing coalition, who are criticized for their political rhetoric and ineffective scare tactics. The prime minister's actions are criticized for the use of whataboutism, which constitutes both substantive and procedural criticism. The intensity of the opposition is moderate, based on current ratings and procedural critiques.

The primary criticism focuses on the internal instability of the ruling coalition (Reform Party, SDE, Estonia 200) and the resulting threat to the country's governance. Furthermore, the Social Democrats are specifically criticized for their poor administration of the city of Tallinn, with critics pointing out that they are failing to manage the city effectively. The criticism is aimed at both the political level (the car tax) and the procedural level (public squabbling).

The primary opposition is aimed at the Foreign Minister and the ruling coalition, sharply criticizing the minister for incompetence, inadequate responses, and breaching parliamentary norms. The criticism also extends to the coalition partners' internal "bickering" during the foreign policy discussion, which highlights the government's internal conflicts.

The main targets of criticism are the government and, specifically, Interior Minister Lauri Läänemets, who is being accused of misjudgment and prioritizing coalition solidarity over public safety. The criticism is rooted in policy and procedure, highlighting internal contradictions within the government (with reference to the criticism leveled by Kaja Kallas and Mart Võrklaev). The speaker expresses disappointment that the coalition refuses to support the opposition’s constructive initiatives purely on political grounds.