By Plenary Sessions: Urve Tiidus

There is not enough data.

No direct confrontation is expressed, but the speaker announces the committee's rejection of the Isamaa faction's amendment (which concerned the symbolism of occupation regimes). The rejection was procedural, as the proposal did not align with the subject matter of Draft Bill 655 concerning digital infrastructure, and occurred with the backing of the ministry's opposition.

The opposition is aimed at the criticism voiced by the respected Ernits, specifically rejecting his comparison to a cemetery as entirely inappropriate. The critique targets the unsuitability of the rhetoric, rather than the substance of the policy, although substantive arguments concerning the necessity of raising fees are offered in response.

There is no direct opposition; the criticism is focused more on the substance and ambition of the budget, questioning whether the resources are sufficient to achieve the technological goals.

Insufficient data.

Not enough data.

There is no direct opposition or criticism directed at political opponents. The speaker addresses the issue of the shadow fleet and environmental risks in the Baltic Sea, explaining that the draft bill under discussion does not regulate this particular subject, maintaining a narrow focus strictly on navigational aids.

The opposition is aimed at the government's budget proposal, but it manifests more as policy-related skepticism and a demand for clarification, rather than outright criticism. This confrontation is policy-driven and low-intensity, requiring assurance regarding the adequacy of funding.