By Plenary Sessions: Jaak Valge

Insufficient data.

The criticism is directed at the government's economic policy, which promotes the influx of cheap labor, as well as the activities of the Estonian Research Council (ETA). The opposition is policy- and procedure-based, taking issue with the evaluation criteria, the use of international experts, and ideological bias (including the requirement for gender equality). The criticism is intense, calling for major changes and an honest analysis.

The opposition is directed against the government and the minister, leveling sharp criticism at the design of the tax policy and overall economic management. The critique is based on policy and procedure, specifically accusing the government of failing to analyze crucial social and regional aspects. The speaker demands that responsibility for inflation be acknowledged.

There is no direct opposition, but a critical and scrutinizing attitude exists regarding the data underpinning the drafts. Clarifications are requested concerning the increasing frequency of violations and the necessity of reducing the customs workload, which points toward procedural scrutiny.

The confrontation is mainly directed at Russian chauvinism and propaganda, which uses the monument as a revanchist demonstration of power, and at local Russian activists who are turning it into a cult object. Procedurally, the government is criticized for interfering with the work of the parliament by means of confidence votes, and questions are raised regarding the legal opinion issued by the Minister of Justice.

The opposition maintains a strong stance, targeting the government's policies regarding migration, the permanent settlement of refugees, and crime statistics. The criticism is both political (claiming the government's policy will lead to a demographic catastrophe in Ukraine) and personal/ideological (accusing the government of political correctness and a lack of objectivity).

The main targets of criticism are the government and the relevant ministries (the Ministry of the Interior, the Ministry of Social Affairs), who are being accused of deliberate stalling. The criticism is aimed at procedural obstruction, as the government employs a standard argument to reject bills proposed by the opposition. The speaker suspects that this is a case of ideological resistance rather than a rational political decision.

The opposition is targeting those who favor economic contraction during the crisis (i.e., the government's current direction), rather than economic stimulus. The criticism is intense and policy-driven, comparing the opponents' actions to historically catastrophic economic decisions that resulted in the most severe economic crisis and social upheaval.

The criticism is aimed at government agencies and ministers, who are accused of inaction, a lack of transparency, and systemic fragmentation. Specifically, the Ministry of Education and Research is criticized for the lack of grounds for its decisions, and the Ministry of Culture for its inability to ensure the political balance of ERR. The criticism is policy- and procedure-based.