By Plenary Sessions: Priit Sibul

The opposition is aimed directly at the Minister of the Interior, criticizing both his political positions (church-related press releases, assessment of security threats) and his personal conduct (tea drinking sessions, his passion for teaching). The criticism is intense, accusing the government of rendering the Estonian state powerless. Furthermore, the Riigikogu Board is also being criticized for failing to forward draft legislation.

The opposition is directed at the budget priorities of the minister/government and the lack of transparency regarding the allocation of investments. The criticism is both procedural and political, aiming to compel the government to disclose specific budget details. The attacks target political decisions, not individuals.

The opposition manifests in calling into question the goals and forecasts of the government's excise policy, demanding explanations from the minister as to why this specific version of taxation was chosen. The criticism is policy-driven, focusing on the risks associated with cross-border trade and the disregard for previous negative experiences.

The opposition is directed at the minister and his party colleagues, who are being criticized for political inconsistency, especially regarding the cap on parental benefits. The criticism is based on policy and rhetoric, accusing the opposing side of making empty promises and failing to provide substantive solutions. The conflict is confrontational and skeptical.

The criticism targets the ambiguity of the government's actions (specifically, the delegation of implementation tasks) and administrative failures (the procurement of the PERH information system). The disagreement is procedural, focusing on the ministry's administrative capacity, and is not personal.