By Plenary Sessions: Helir-Valdor Seeder

The main targets of criticism are the Ministry of Culture (for cutting sports subsidies) and the government as a whole (for the centralizing regional reform). The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, accusing the government of increasing bureaucracy and making illogical decisions. The speaker issues a direct challenge, asking whether it wouldn't be more appropriate to replace the minister if the funding is not reaching rural areas.

The primary criticism is leveled against the government or the budget drafters because the budget is non-transparent and violates the constitution. The criticism is intense and procedural, extending accountability to the president as well, who, in the speaker's view, should have sent the bill back.

The criticism targets the bill's potentially populist nature, suggesting resistance to legislation founded on vague motives. Specific opponents or groups are not named; rather, the critique is aimed at the procedure and the underlying concept.

The opposition is directed at the government and the leadership of the Finance Committee, who are being criticized for ignoring the opposition and for improper procedure. The criticism is intense, focusing both on policy (tax hikes) and procedural violations, with accusations that the leadership is suppressing the rights of the opposition. Rather than discussing compromise, strict adherence to the rules is being demanded.

The primary opponent is the ruling coalition and its ministers, who are criticized for engaging in mere busywork and demonstrating incompetence. The accusation leveled by the Minister of Education against Isamaa is particularly strongly rejected, being labeled an irrational conspiracy theory. The criticism focuses on procedural errors (specifically, ignoring traditional negotiation practices) and a fundamental lack of political substance.

The main confrontation is directed at the government (Kristen Michal's cabinet), which is accused of a lack of clarity and unfairness in its tax policy concerning the security tax. Furthermore, the rapporteur and the commission are sharply criticized for their handling of the draft bill, with demands for the correction of flawed documents and strict adherence to procedural rules.

The criticism is directed against the political stance of the current government coalition (especially Kaja Kallas's third government) and the Minister of the Interior, stemming from their decision to grant exceptional citizenship 28 times within a short timeframe. It also criticizes the original 2006 legal amendment introduced by that year's coalition (the Reform Party, the Centre Party, and the People's Union). The criticism is rooted in policy and procedure, accusing the government of unequal treatment and creating security risks.

The main opponents are the government (ministries), the Finance Committee, and the chair of the session. The criticism is intense and focuses on procedural violations (the removal of amendments) and political dishonesty (the lack of specific earmarking for tax revenue, and plugging budget holes). [The speaker] accuses the majority of silencing the opposition and engaging in a "gang-up," which undermines trust in the state.

No data available