By Plenary Sessions: Priit Sibul

The criticism is directed at the draft bill's substantive inefficiency and the parliament's overreach regarding its jurisdiction in matters of canon law. He/She also criticizes the recent actions of the Ministry of the Interior (led by Läänemets), which, in his/her estimation, have created legal confusion concerning the change of the church's name. The opposition is policy-based and procedural, not personal, and while he/she does not rule out a compromise, he/she views the bill's objectives as largely unattainable.

The primary confrontation is with the government and its coalition partners, who are being criticized for the lack of clarity in their labor policy and for potentially introducing cheaper labor. The criticism is policy-based, calling into question the government’s ability to ensure high value-added economic growth and control immigration.

There is not enough data.

Direct opposition is not being voiced; rather, probing questions are being put to the government regarding policy implementation and the fulfillment of priorities. The criticism is aimed at the effectiveness of the government's activities and the precision with which it tackles problems, especially concerning skilled labor regulations.

Strong opposition is directed at the governing coalition, which is criticized for the discrepancies between its rhetoric and its actual actions (e.g., the rejection of accelerated ammunition procurement). The criticism is particularly sharp regarding the Ministry of the Interior and environmental protection, concerning the "harassment" of gun owners and hunters. The criticism is primarily policy- and procedure-based, accusing the government of misleading the public.