By Plenary Sessions: Rain Epler

The main opponents are scientists, activists, and politically influential business figures (e.g., Ragn-Sells) who support the climate consensus and are accused of profiting under the guise of environmental slogans. Coalition representatives (Igor Taro) are particularly sharply criticized for hypocrisy. The criticism is often directed at a personal level, calling into question the competence and motives of the opponents.

The opposition is aimed at the government coalition, particularly the Social Democrats, who are viewed as an obstacle to implementing the desired policy. The reasoning of the committee that rejected the bill is also being criticized, with demands for its justifications to be made public. The criticism is political and procedural, and it is intense.

The main opposition is aimed at the Prime Minister and the government's policies, with particular criticism directed at the Minister of Social Protection for stripping stay-at-home mothers of their health insurance. The critique is policy-based, focusing on the unrealistic nature of the budget, the inefficient allocation of expenditures, and the poor management of strategic projects (Rail Baltic).

The primary opponents are the coalition (the "Sunrise Government"), the Ministry of Finance, and the Finance Committee, all of whom are accused of budget opacity and avoiding oversight. The text sharply criticizes the government's motives, questioning whether PR staff must be kept on the payroll simply to explain the government's detrimental actions. Furthermore, it accuses ERR (Estonian Public Broadcasting) of engaging in propaganda instead of actual journalism.

The main confrontation is aimed at the ruling coalition, which is accused of setting the wrong course in both energy and social policy. The Social Democrats (Sotsid) face particular criticism for obstructing nuclear energy development, with critics pointing to an "opposition with a whiff of corruption." The criticism is intense and addresses both political choices and the government's integrity in its responses.

The main opponents are the governing coalition and specific ministers/colleagues (Jaak Aab, Urmas, Lomp), who are being criticized for political dishonesty and lack of integrity. The criticism is twofold: both personal (concerning the trustworthiness of the politicians) and political (focusing on tax hikes and the deficiencies of the social welfare reform). There is no apparent willingness to compromise; instead, the demand is for a change in policy and the reintroduction of restrictions.

The speaker, who is in the opposition, is criticizing the committee for rushing the rejection of the opposition's draft bill. They cast doubt on the sincerity of the Isamaa party (Mart/Kokk) concerning the abolition of the car tax, implying that their actions in the committee were contradictory. The criticism is aimed both at the content of the policy and at the procedural injustice.

The main opponent is the prime minister and the government, whose green transition policy is facing sharp criticism due to its economically unsound and unstable direction. The criticism is substantive, focusing on the core policy, and demands immediate policy change, not a compromise.

The main opponent is the Prime Minister and the government, who are criticized for unrealistic optimism, the use of slogans, and the lack of a serious long-term plan regarding energy issues. The criticism is aimed at the substance of the policy and the effectiveness of the government's actions.

The main confrontation is directed at the Reform Party-led government, which is accused of causing economic and social decline. Additionally, a former colleague (Jaak) is being criticized on a personal level, specifically for switching sides and demonstrating political untrustworthiness. The criticism is both policy-based and performance-based.