By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The main opponents are the Reform Party (Õnne Pillak, Andres Sutt) and the coalition members as a whole, who are accused of fast-tracking laws and failing to delve into their substance. The criticism is intense, accusing Pillak of outright lying and the coalition of behaving like a "flock of sheep." No willingness to compromise with the government is being shown; instead, they are demanding a vote against the draft legislation.

Intense criticism has been leveled against the Social Democrats (Sotsid) and particularly Anti Allas, who is accused of contradictory voting on the car tax issue and personal hypocrisy (buying a jeep before the tax was implemented). The criticism targets both the political strategy and personal behavior, suggesting an underlying political-technological ulterior motive.

The main opponents are the government coalition (Reform Party, Social Democrats, Estonia 200) and the bill's presenter, Maris Lauri. The criticism is intense and substantive, accusing the opponents of lying, impoverishing the populace, and endangering democracy. The opposition is absolute, as a proposal is being made on behalf of the faction to immediately terminate the bill's proceedings.

The confrontation is aimed at the government and ministers, criticizing political objectives (ESG, renewable energy) and systemic inefficiencies. The criticism is both political (specifically, ignoring expert recommendations regarding the emergency response system) and personal, referencing the minister’s prior business activities. The speaker demands the disclosure of the cost and timeline figures required to fix these systems.

The primary criticism is leveled against the Reform Party and the coalition, accusing them of underestimating rural residents (labeling them "poorly informed") and burdening the populace with a bureaucratic yoke. The activities of the ERJK (Political Parties Financing Surveillance Committee) are sharply criticized, which is deemed politically biased and part of Liisa Oviir’s personal campaign. Irony and sarcasm are employed to highlight the contradictory behavior of the opponents.

The confrontation is aimed at the Prime Minister and the government, criticizing both their procedural conduct and their failure to ensure the timely completion of Rail Baltic. The intensity of the criticism is high, as the speaker issued a direct challenge to the Prime Minister by asking whether a Latvian Member of Parliament had lied about the project's status.