By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder

The opposition is directed at the government's actions, criticizing the potential appointment of Mart Võrklaev to the Bank of Estonia as a reward (or token of gratitude) for implementing the car tax. The criticism is personal and focuses on political favoritism, demanding an immediate explanation from the opposing side.

Strong opposition is directed at the coalition parties (the Social Democrats, Eesti 200, the Reform Party), who are accused of unwarranted criticism of Isamaa. The criticism is policy-based, particularly aimed at the Social Democrats, who failed to strongly support the proposal for a fixed price for the universal service. Colleague Aab's statement regarding the price of the universal service is considered outright misleading.

The opposition targets the forecasts of the government's energy policy and the level of detail in its planning. The criticism is policy-driven, demanding clarity on the feasibility of the 100% renewable energy goal and the associated risks.

The main opponents are the government as a whole and specific ministers (Tsahkna, Kallas, Terras, Taro), who are criticized for their contradictory stances on fiscal and tax policy. The criticism is policy-based, accusing the government of reducing economic competitiveness and hindering economic growth. Strong expressions are used, such as "brutal cuts" and "complete stupidity," to describe the government's policies.

The primary opposition is aimed at the government's tax policy and inefficient public transport, which is widely viewed as punishing the populace. Strong criticism is also leveled against the Riigikogu Board and its committees for violating established parliamentary good practice when processing draft legislation in the absence of the bill's initiator. The criticism is both policy-based and procedural.