By Plenary Sessions: Priit Sibul

The main confrontation is directed at Defence Minister Hanno Pevkur, whose activities and ethical conduct concerning personnel in the defence sector are being called into question. The criticism is intense and focuses on personal conduct, conflicts of interest, and the spreading of suspicion, rather than political decisions per se. Opposition is also directed at the previous government, which, in the context of the 1.6 billion figure, merely generated hot air.

The main confrontation is aimed at the coalition and the Government Office, who are being criticized for the bureaucracy and insufficient involvement that arose during the transposition of the directive. The criticism is both procedural and substantive, accusing officials of formulating a draft bill that is easier to defend in Brussels than it is to implement in Estonia. The opposition is intense and culminates in the rejection of the draft bill.

The opposition is indirectly aimed at the current Minister of Justice’s plans to bring foreign prisoners to Estonia. The criticism is policy-based, as they are seeking an assessment from the Chancellor of Justice regarding whether these plans are legally feasible and what potential problems might arise.

The speaker is in an opposition role, criticizing the government or the previous coalition for establishing a broad-based security tax and for the ambiguity surrounding its financial planning. The critique is directed at the political decision-making process and the lack of transparency, demanding specific figures from the respondents.

The opposition is directed at the governing coalition, which is criticized for internal disputes ("you argue even within the party") and for the lack of clarity surrounding the implementation of the new security tax. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based, focusing primarily on the absence of financial transparency.