By Plenary Sessions: Enn Eesmaa

Insufficient data.

Insufficient data.

The criticism is aimed at the procedural failure to establish a tradition that would allow for dialogue with the prime minister, despite the PM's eloquence. Direct opponents are not named, but regret is expressed that the desired procedural change was not realized.

While there is no direct opposition, the speaker indirectly points to an issue concerning the transparency of the legislative process, noting that the public cannot access the details of the draft bill. The criticism is aimed more at a procedural deficiency than at a specific political adversary.

No opposing views or criticism directed at adversaries are raised. The focus is on deliberating the draft legislation and responding to questions from colleagues.

There is not enough data.

Insufficient data.

Insufficient data

The criticism is aimed at the Estonian Conservative People's Party faction (EKRE), which initially submitted 50 obstructive amendments that stalled the bill's proceedings. The criticism is also substantive, addressing inaccuracies in the bill concerning terminology and equipment. The standoff is mainly procedural and focused on clarifying the substance of the policy.

The criticism is aimed squarely at those who promised to erect the glass pavilion, as well as heritage protection organizations (like the Heritage Board and the UN), who are being slammed for failing to stand against its construction. The opposition is intense, centering on the aesthetic and urban planning unsuitability of the structure in a public space.

The confrontation is aimed at the Reform Party and its representative, who previously held the relevant ministerial post. The criticism focuses on the party's long-term failure to solve specific problems (wages and compensation), despite having been in power during that time.

Insufficient data