By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The main adversaries are the officials and the coalition, who are being criticized for political opposition and bureaucratic obstruction. The criticism is intense, directly referencing the dishonesty of the officials ("they’re just making things up") and political retaliation in rejecting opposition bills. He suspects the bill is being rejected solely because it was initiated by the opposition.

The speaker's position is clearly oppositional, demanding constructive handling of the opposition's draft legislation from the government (or the minister) and the coalition. The criticism is aimed at the culture of procedure and procedural fairness, not at individuals.

The confrontation is directed at the government and the prime minister, whose tax policy is being criticized in the context of the economic downturn. The criticism is policy-based and focuses on the negative impact of the government's decisions on the country's economic attractiveness.

The main opponent is the Reform Party, which is being directly criticized for introducing the car tax bill and for policies that restrict residents' property rights. The criticism is intense and ideological, accusing the government of serving the interests of a narrow elite and "collecting poverty." The minister drew criticism because he failed to present an economic analysis, offering only his optimism instead.

The criticism focuses on the inadequate analysis of the draft legislation, especially concerning the ministry's assertion that the workload will not significantly increase due to the regulation on water reuse. The speaker also requests clarification regarding colleague Valdo Randpere's claims that he was prevented from speaking, emphasizing procedural fairness.

The primary target is the Prime Minister and the government, who face criticism both for their political choices (immigration, economic recession, risks to defense capability) and for procedural and personal issues (unreliability, emotionless responses, and favoring party colleagues in the chamber). The intensity of the criticism is high, and the government's competence to lead the country is being called into question.

The opposition is primarily aimed at systemic inertia (the medical system's desire to route everything through its own channels) and the violation of parliamentary work procedures. [The speaker] criticizes colleague Pakosta for straying from the substance of the matter and pointedly asks whether the board's decisions are deemed inadequate. The criticism targets both procedural incompetence and substantive inaccuracy.

The main opponent is the Reform Party, which is being criticized for breaking its 2009 promise regarding the temporary nature of the value-added tax (VAT). The criticism is aimed both at political untrustworthiness and specific tax hikes. The speaker notes ironically that it would be difficult for the Reform Party to support the proposal, as doing so would set a precedent for them to actually fulfill a long-standing promise.

The primary adversary is the ruling coalition and the prime minister, whose actions are criticized for poor economic performance and increasing the national debt burden. The criticism is both substantive (a decline in competitiveness) and political, accusing the government of failures and ironically pointing to the blaming of Jüri Ratas as a method of evading responsibility.

The speaker is strongly refuting the accusations of obstruction, flatly denying any such activity. He personally criticizes Mr. Ligi, demanding that he remain silent, which suggests a sharp personal confrontation regarding parliamentary procedure.

The criticism is aimed directly at the ruling coalition, which is accused of causing the decline of media freedom and making poor energy policy choices. The critique is based on policy and performance, asserting that the government is pursuing the wrong priorities under the banner of the green transition. The possibility of compromise is not mentioned; the focus remains on holding the government accountable.