By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder

The primary confrontation is aimed at the Social Democrats, who are being accused of holding the coalition hostage, manipulating the electorate, and undermining the state's security interests. Criticism is also leveled at the Reform Party and Eesti 200, who are being urged to "cast off those chains around them" and vote according to their conscience. The criticism is intense and covers both policy issues (voting rights for stateless persons) and procedural matters (unclear delegation, the Brezhnev package).

The main opponents are the governing coalition, especially the Social Democrats, who are accused of holding their coalition partners hostage and steamrolling the parliamentary majority. The Prime Minister is criticized for spreading false information and ignoring the search for common ground. The criticism is both political (security) and procedural (rejection of compromise).

The main opponents are the governing coalition, the Reform Party, and the Prime Minister, all of whom are being sharply criticized for the way they implement policy. Criticism is directed at both procedural violations (such as the uncoordinated land tax increase) and unethical behavior (like concealing plans before the elections). The government's actions are being labeled irresponsible and hypocritical.

The primary targets of criticism are the government coalition, the Finance Committee, and the National Defence Committee, who stand accused of illegally dismissing Isamaa's amendments and violating the Rules of Procedure and Internal Rules Act. Criticism is also aimed at the ministers (Jürgen Ligi, Piret Hartman) and the chairman of the Finance Committee (Annely), citing their incompetence and the declining quality of budget preparation. The speaker protests resolutely and deems compromise impossible under the current procedural circumstances.

The main targets of criticism are the minister and ministry officials, who are accused of creating illogical regions and pressuring local governments into signing agreements. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, accusing the officials of creating an opportunity for centralization in order to manage financial resources. Instead of a compromise, there is an urgent demand for the immediate cessation of the activity.