By Plenary Sessions: Jaak Valge

It directly contradicts the previous speaker's assertions regarding the economic damage associated with abandoning Rail Baltic. The criticism is politically based and targets the validity of the economic arguments, deeming the GDP increase as merely formal.

The primary confrontation is directed at the government and the prime minister, criticizing the lack of transparency in their decision-making process and their disregard for local residents. The criticism is intense and accusatory, claiming that the government treats Estonian citizens like state subjects or serfs. The opposition is policy- and procedure-based, calling into question the government's wisdom in governing the country.

The criticism is aimed at the inaction of the Slava Ukraini representatives, specifically their decision not to file a civil lawsuit. The speaker suspects that this could be a deliberate omission on someone’s part, suggesting criticism of either a systemic failure or a personal lapse.

The speaker is clearly in opposition and has signed the motion of no confidence. Their oppositional stance targets the lack of future policy planning, specifically demanding concrete steps in the area of population policy. Despite this fundamental disagreement (the signing of the no-confidence motion), the tone of the criticism offered remains largely constructive and policy-driven.

The primary criticism is aimed at the activities of the Russian embassy, which are considered to undermine Estonian statehood. Criticism is also leveled against the government’s (or the minister’s) inaction and inability to solve the problem following the warning issued in the spring, citing internal disagreements and the failure to deliver on promises.

The primary opposition is aimed at the government's immigration policy, which is widely viewed as detrimental and lacking a popular mandate. The criticism is policy-based, accusing the government of causing a drop in productivity and effectively freezing wage levels by importing cheap labor. Furthermore, the OSKA reports are criticized for being biased toward employers, and the minister (who is absent) is faulted for failing to delve deeply enough into the issue.

The main opponents are the government coalition and specific ministers (Lauri Läänemets, the Minister of Climate, and the Minister of Education and Research). Criticism is directed both at political decisions (such as the protection of Ukrainian men and energy projects) and procedural deficiencies (including violations of the rules of procedure and a lack of transparency). The speaker accuses the government of acting against Estonian security (by concealing hybrid operations) and supporting Russia's historical narrative (by suppressing the memory of the Battle of Sinimäed).