By Plenary Sessions: Urmas Reinsalu

The opposition is directed against the government coalition and its leading members (Michal, Alender, Kivistik), who are accused of incompetence, lying, and irresponsible policies. The attacks are intense and focus on the failure of political decisions (the Kiisa power plant, the Eesti Energia rating) and procedural failures (lack of transparency, "buying a pig in a poke"). Compromise is ruled out, as the suspension of the bill's reading is being demanded.

The speaker is clearly in opposition to the government, criticizing both the Prime Minister and the former Climate Minister for developing new charges. The criticism targets the government's political logic (the postponement of the Kiisa plant) and the lack of transparency in forecasting new tax burdens. The opposition is intense and demands concrete answers, not political ambiguity.

The main opponent is the government coalition, which is described as a "partially dismantled coalition" and is sharply criticized for its political choices (subsidized energy sector, the 2.6 billion euro offshore wind farm project) and for its unreliable conduct (breaking promises regarding land tax). The criticism is intense, accusing the government of misleading the public, of inaction, and of ignoring security interests concerning the right of entry issue. Instead of compromise, there is a demand for the government to admit its mistakes and to make choices that comply with Isamaa's conditions.

The main confrontation is with the government and the prime minister, whose inflation policy is considered detrimental and inflationary. The criticism is intense and focuses on the negative impact of political decisions (tax hikes), as well as the government's inability to provide Parliament with a substantive explanation of its policies. This stance contradicts the prime minister's conclusion that wage pressure is driving inflation, pointing instead to the collapse of labor productivity.

The main opponent is the government (referring to both Kristen Michal’s and Kaja Kallas’s cabinets), which is accused of systematically acting against the state’s declared objectives and manufacturing mere appearances. The criticism is policy- and results-based, focusing on tax increases, ignoring the birth rate crisis, and inflating administrative costs. The speaker argues that the government’s political agenda is moving radically in the opposite direction from its stated goals.

The main opponents are the prime minister and former leaders of the governing parties, who are sharply criticized for pushing through the €2.6 billion project without analytical justification. The criticism targets both political mismanagement and a lack of transparency, accusing the government of misleading the public and creating risks of corruption. The speaker emphasizes that the head of government cannot "shirk the responsibility of governing the state."

The primary opponents are the parties of the ruling coalition: the Reform Party, Eesti 200, and the Social Democrats. The criticism is intense and uncompromising, accusing them of deception, incompetence, and pushing through an unconstitutional and unreasonable law. The goal is the complete repeal of the car tax, which rules out any compromise.

The main criticism is directed against the Government of the Republic, which is accused of delaying strategic initiatives and operating at an insufficient pace for several years now. The criticism is policy- and procedure-focused, emphasizing that the pace has been inadequate for achieving solutions of substantive quality.

The opposition is aimed at the government and the coalition, who are accused of pursuing policies that consciously fuel inflation and worsen the outlook for the Estonian economy. The criticism is sharp and policy-based, rejecting the coalition’s claims regarding the car tax objectives (road construction, public transport) and pointing instead to the funding of the Reform Party’s "tax hump" (maksuküür). Compromise on the car tax is ruled out, with demands for its complete (one hundred percent) abolition.