I think that we will liquidate this KSEF, and we will certainly reshape it, that is, we the society, we the entrepreneurs. If this system collapses now and does not work at any IT or even social level, if people do not accept it or use it, then someone must be held responsible. So the system defends itself against these types of accusations. The system does not want to be dismantled immediately. We've had enough. We've had enough. We are not here to be robbed, to be abused all the time , to be trained in every possible way so that we become like dogs that are trained in such societies and are defenseless because they see that something is wrong here. they steal. Some others come with a different religion, they rob us, sometimes they even rape us, but we are not allowed to react because we are so decent. In a democratic state, social representation has been elected in the form of senators and the president, who will sign the bill, and the official reads the bill and says that he does not like this provision, as it is written, he will decide exactly differently what this is, some kind of fraud. Contributions, the number of contributions and, as I colloquially say, the names of contributions, i.e. the types and kinds of contributions are identical in the employment contract as in the contract of mandate. identical, not similar, identical. The percentage components and percentage coefficients for calculating these contributions are, please note, identical, not similar, identical to those in the employment contract. Why do ministers come out uncritically and thoughtlessly and without any competences, hesitation saying that this is a junk contract, since it has all the same factors. The only difference is that one of the components, one of the contributions is voluntary or not, but it is the least important one, and the cheapest one at that. The idea is to eliminate the right to choose. And if you eliminate the right to choose whether you employ someone under an employment contract or a civil law contract, then you can shape and manage the entire population within that employment contract. People will no longer slip out of your system. Spicy Business Podcast. Enter the world of inspiring Polish entrepreneurs. Szymon Ostrowski invites you. Hi, my name is Szymon Ostrowski, and this is the Biznes na Ostro channel, where we talk about business, entrepreneurship, finance, and all the elements that will help you run your businesses better and more effectively. Before I introduce you to my guest today, remember to subscribe, thumbs up, and comment. And my guest today is Professor Mariusz Miąsko, a professor from the Nicolaus Copernicus School in Warsaw. Good morning. Hello and welcome. Good morning. Hello, Mr. Editor, hello, ladies and gentlemen . I am very pleased that we can meet in this hot time of the National Power System. This is because you are the author of the petition to eliminate the National System of Electronic Invoices. The petition was, so to speak, presented to the public. Well, despite everything, this KSEW entered. We have been dealing with this system for several days. So what's this about ? Resistance always makes sense and has meaning. This system has reached a certain segment of enterprises, for now only the largest ones, at least in relation to some invoices, because when it comes to costs, it has de facto been extended to all entrepreneurs, so this also shows a certain attempt to distort the narrative by officials from the Ministry of Finance and the government as a whole, claiming that supposedly only some entrepreneurs are affected by this ailment, this misfortune, because it must be said frankly, this is our misfortune. I think that we will liquidate this KSEW, and we will certainly reshape it, that is, we the society, we the entrepreneurs. Firstly, there are several million of us, and secondly, we have strength. Thirdly, we have extensive experience in conversations and discussions with the government at various levels, with successive governments at various levels. Either we do it in a way that we are partners with each other, or we do it in a way that is burdensome. I have been an entrepreneur for 26 years, I run several companies. In connection with the above, I do not recall such an unimaginably difficult situation and such difficulties in running a business as we currently experience in the Union, and you could say that each government is worse, because we all hope that the next government will come and that this next government will fulfill its election promises based on which it will be easier for us to run a business. it always gets worse and that's what's needed and it seems to me that we entrepreneurs have matured to a stage, a moment where we will now say quite authentically, really enough, and not only to KSEF. KSEF is just a trigger, it only ignited a certain social mood among entrepreneurs. In fact, we already care about, as I would say, everything. We are already concerned with all the other ailments we have. Mandates, taxes, quasi-taxes, etca, etca. We will address this in a moment, but I would like to focus a little more on this KSEF first. What is the biggest threat to this KSEF, since you are promoting its liquidation? Because we entrepreneurs are told that okay, there will be digitalization, that it will make running a business easier, that we won't lose invoices, that there will be more order in documents. For me this is another burden. This is a completely false narrative that things are supposed to be easier for us. Officials should ask us if it will be easier for us. They should have consulted with us in public consultations, which is what they were obliged to do during the legislative process of implementing this project with us, i.e. with business associations. Um, and if it really came out from these public consultations that we are in favor of implementing this solution, just like, for example, we have, uh, a prescription machine, an electronic prescription, a solution that serves us all. If the result of these consultations were similar, i.e. positive, then I understand that the ministry is implementing it, but I do not know how these consultations were conducted or with whom they were conducted, because I do not know of any association or organization representing the interests of us entrepreneurs that would support this ill-conceived idea. It is very dangerous and unconventional on many levels, but many experts have already commented on all these other aspects, that it involves personal data, data, and company data. It is unimaginably important that the operator is private companies that actually have access to all the secrets of this system, because formally it is only operated, purely formally, of course, by the ministry, but since the system was created by private companies, let's face it, I am, among other things, a software producer in my company, one of my companies has produced nine computer programs. Well, we all know that as software administrators, when administering and servicing this software, we inevitably have access to all information. But these are important things, but I would say they are secondary. The basic, basic threat is this, this permanent pressure on us. I mean, there will be this official, or maybe it's just an actress pretending to be an official, but on behalf of the Ministry of Finance, she's telling us on TV that all we have to do is click here, there, here and there , and after a few clicks we 're already logged in. Dear officials, we are already fed up with your ideas. up to the noses of your clicks, your logins, passwords, your your your explanation that all we need to do is create another login, another password, get in somewhere, and we will be able to run a business. The point is that you are constantly putting pressure on us. You politicians are pressing us, you officials are pressing us. Year after year, month after month, you add more and more technical burdens to our lives . there is slowly running out of time to run a business. The purpose of business activity is to generate profit, part of which we share with the Polish state in the form of taxes. What do you officials do? What are you politicians doing? You have created a situation where we have nothing to share with the state, with society, with the weaker. We have nothing to share because you constantly give us purely operational tasks that mean we have no time to run our business . But there is one more thing you, politicians and officials, did not pay attention to. Well, we have different companies. There are powerful corporations, large companies and medium-sized companies that perhaps have all the necessary tools, including personnel, intellectual skills, and competences, to click on something in your nicknames and your other ideas. But there are also small, very small, one-person and medium-sized companies that have neither the time, nor the means, nor the financial resources, nor the additional budget for this. Very often they also do not have intellectual resources. Not because they are limited in any way, but because they are of a certain age or are in a certain , I would say general, emotional state. Well, you must know that business, and I say this after 26 years of running a business, is hard work in Łgora. This is unimaginably hard plowing on Łgorzen. And now something special for the viewers. Business in a nutshell. If your local business is choking on costs and customers are fleeing to chain stores, I have a closed source for you. How to increase local business profits in 30 days. You will reduce costs by 20% without cutting quality. You will attract loyal customers without expensive advertising. You will turn one-time visits into a steady income. In the material you will find over 50 examples of activities, ready-made checklists, a calculator and a 30-day plan. Download from the link in the description. Strengthen your business today. I believe that top-level officials should always be selected according to one key. This means that first you should have successfully run a business for at least 10 years and only then you should be allowed to hold the highest positions in offices. Then you would understand us. Back then you didn't make such stupid decisions as the one with Ksew. This is another unwise decision. Then you would not torment us, because you would have walked this path yourselves. You, along with the association you represent, the Best Way, also boast that your interventions in various other matters have an effectiveness rate of about 70% . Why was it not possible to block KSEFU immediately? Yes, indeed the Nasza Droga Association is a very small association, but one of the most active in Poland. There are nearly 400 interventions there, this is one association. I have managed to establish more of these associations in my life even at this point, even today we are organizing more. This is a type and manifestation of direct democracy. I encourage you, I'll be happy to even tell you how it's done. And indeed, this association, this association and our associations have a very high effectiveness rate because we base our interventions on legal interventions, because in reality we all live in a legal soup, right? This is where we are surrounded by law. Everything we have here, this microphone, this desk, this water, everything we are, all of it once functioned in some way in some connection with and relationship with the law. So it is possible to fight the state, so to speak. So how does it even sound that we have to fight the state? With this system? Maybe not with the state, the state is us, but with this system. There is only one way to fight effectively and in a truly civilized way, namely through legal instruments. And the fact that we are effective is because I am a lawyer, I have one of the largest Polish law firms, we have excellent legal resources, and this means that we articulate our expectations in a precisely defined way, in a specific form and formula. That's one thing. Second, why couldn't this be blocked earlier? For several reasons. First of all, it must be said that it was implemented quietly. This system was quietly implemented. I have already said that in accordance with the applicable Polish law, in Poland there is an obligation to invite social representatives in certain places of the legislative process. I don't know who was invited there. To be honest, we did not receive an invitation as one of the most active Polish associations. Well, the tabena is a public benefit organization, that is, in the highest rank of associations, i.e. only such associations receive this status that demonstrate enormous achievements in pro-public benefit activities. I don't know why we weren't invited and I don't know who was invited. By the way, we had to take a closer look at who was invited there and who gave a positive opinion on this legislative path. And it may turn out that this path was not on the legislative path of this point. And maybe even if he was, it's very possible that some kind of fiction was realized there or appeared there. But why do you also need to know that this is a process? So when I say that we have had nearly 400 interventions there, then in these 400 interventions, one of them , two of these 400 interventions we classify as yyy the limitation and elimination of the imposition of y illegal y penalties on truck drivers for passing through Bramowinice in Viatol. It was applied there, which will well illustrate the answer to your question. for each gantry passed per driver, if there was no fee. The driver, I would like to emphasize, had no influence on this , because the car belonged to a transport company. The driver was fined PLN 8,000 each. Some of them collected several hundred thousand zlotys in fines. The regulation stated that the upper limit was 8,000 PLN, but the Polish state system, not the state, imposed 8,000 PLN. I do n't know why it was more convenient. Apparently, it looked better and it took us a year, the association, a year, the Law and Justice party (PiS), preparing letters to the Ministry of Transport, then the Infrastructure, to the Chief Inspector of Road Transport, to the Ombudsman, and appearing in all the media, a year and now it's some kind of process. The system doesn't just give up immediately. It does n't want to collapse immediately. The system is actually fighting us for its survival, because what will happen now? If we can demonstrate that this KSE system was perhaps flawed in the legislative process, that mandatory elements and public consultation stages were missing, or that they were fictitious, then someone has to face consequences, right? If this system collapses now and does not work at any IT or even social level, if people do not accept it or use it, then someone must be held responsible. So the system defends itself against these types of accusations. The system does not want to be dismantled immediately. This is a bit of an answer to the question of why some interventions quickly bring results. Let me give you an example of such an intervention that quickly brought results. This is an intervention from just a few weeks ago, where the government tried to implement such an amendment to the Act on the National Labor Inspectorate and the Labor Code. And now please note that I wrote a petition addressed to the Prime Minister, to the President of the Republic of Poland, uh, to the Minister of Labor, in which I demonstrated that at least a dozen areas violate the Polish constitution of this, uh, this proposed amendment. It had tens of thousands of views, but it was already enough, so to speak, socially painful. I also appeared in some national media pointing out this problem, and after four days the Prime Minister came out and officially announced at a press conference that he was freezing this project. I mean, resistance makes sense and there are cases where it brings quick results and there are cases where it does not. Why did this one come to fruition so quickly? because in the case of the National Labor Inspectorate, because since the petition was sent to the President of the Republic of Poland, and I demonstrated from my academic work that I am a doctor of law with a specialization in labor law at the Jagiellonian University, so labor law is an area in which I have been operating for 20 years, so I demonstrated, using appropriate instruments, that beyond any doubt this project violates the entire cascade of regulations, then, of course, the Chancellery of the Prime Minister clearly made a cool assessment and concluded that it would not pass anyway. It doesn't pay off politically, that is, it does n't pay off in the stakes. This means they will lose anyway, because even if the president pushes it through the votes in the Sejm and Senate, they will still lose at the presidential level, because the president will refuse to sign it, demonstrating its unconstitutionality, or, even worse, will refer it to the Constitutional Tribunal. And that's why some interventions are more effective because, for example, they were revealed earlier. this problem became apparent earlier and we were able to react at the right time, while others simply take longer to break down the walls. But we are seasoned in this as Poles, in this grassroots democracy, actually from before 1989. Due to the above, it seems to me that there is more and more awareness and need for grassroots democracy and we will be able to cope with this KSEM as well. I would like to ask about this postulate that Mr. yyy also puts forward regarding the fact that you cannot hold government positions if you do not have yyy at least 10 years of experience, at least in running a company. This is actually a realistic postulate. It may simply be that someone doesn't necessarily want to run a company, but that doesn't mean they can't become someone who will manage the state. Maybe he knows medicine very well , maybe he knows housing very well , but he doesn't necessarily have to know how to run a business. Mhm. Well, he has to prove it somehow, that's my proposition, let him prove that he knows what he's doing. I checked what the previous ministers, deputy prime ministers, prime ministers and ministers of individual ministries were doing. They almost never had any specialized or basic education, so I can assume that they had no competences. So if they have neither education nor any other proof of the effectiveness of their actions, then there is no indication that they are capable of managing a country. Therefore, as an entrepreneur, I started with a simple assumption: I believe that I would like to live in a country where the Minister of Finance, who manages the state's finances, and the Prime Minister, who manages the state's finances, and the Deputy Prime Ministers and Ministers, who manage the individual finances of individual ministries, had to manage something beforehand, but they did n't manage something where they were given a budget that fell from the sky, meaning they were given a ready-made budget, but they had to work for every zloty, because I've been working for every zloty for 26 years. I fight for every zloty and before I spend it, I turn it over four times and check if I am spending it rationally. Meanwhile, people who were directors of whatever, I don't know, institutions, tinker tanks, etc., suddenly became politicians and ministers at the age of 20. This is some kind of pathology. Well, the tail wags the dog. I mean, we, business people, are suddenly being managed by people who have never had a clue about business in their lives . I'm not taking anything away from anyone, but how is it that we have a tradition in Poland that prime ministers are historians? Well, I'm very sorry, that's cool. I have nothing against historians. But what is the competence to manage the state? It is neither a competence for management, nor for financial subsidies, nor for the organization of work. Well, no, just so you understand, I am not against any education or profession. Do you understand? Everything just has to be in the right place and at the right time and everyone has to be in the right position for themselves. Well, can you imagine going to the doctor and saying, "I have the flu," and a man comes out with a historian badge. And yet it is in the Polish state. You go to the Prime Minister, and a historian writes there, right? Well, we have one now, but if we look at Polish prime ministers or Polish finance ministers, they most often do not have basic education. After all, it seems to me that my proposal is most apropos. If you don't have basic education, then you have to prove in some other way that you can manage something. You have been managing for 10 years. Why 10 and not five? And for a very simple reason. And get tired of it. And look how much effort it is. And see what it's like if every year there's a constant stream of new responsibilities, new tasks, and you don't have the resources to perform these competencies. And fight for 10 years, work 18 hours, 16, 18 hours, and sometimes 24. And see what a hardship it is in the workplace. And you can't manage people without understanding their problems. It seems to me, in connection with the above, that this postulate is absolutely true, apropos, no, the state is a business like any other, in a sense. Of course, it is different from everyone else in that it has its own aspects of a strategic and social nature, right? You have to show a certain sensitivity to protect, yes, the poorest people, those most in need, yes, but in this strictly business, revenue-generating layer, it's just a business like any other. If the prime ministers understood, if they were businessmen, they would not be closing down Polish mines, because they would understand that this is a source of cheap, cheaper energy, but at the same time it is a source of financing, but at the same time it is a source of competence and intellectual resources, right? in because engineers work there , it is the development of Polish science etc., etc. They wouldn't make a whole cascade of disastrous decisions. I observe this, yes, I have been with these governments for 26 years, and at various levels I have had the opportunity to either advise or serve. If I say so, when I served the first one, it was the SLDPSL, I thought it was the worst government I would ever serve in my life, because I had this idea from before 1989 that everything from that time had to be the worst. And to my surprise, I found that I now find that it was probably the best government I have ever served, and certainly the most libertarian, as evidenced by the Wolfman Act, right? So let's not judge based on these emotions that are injected into us and poisoned in the mainstream, but let's make rational assessments and manage them and choose such people and decide about the people who govern us in the same way as we would at home, right? Or how, i.e., would we like to have a boss who and work for a boss who is not in the company, who cannot manage the company and all he does is permanently put it in debt? Well, that's what we currently have as our leaders and that's how it goes . I am very strongly anti-political. I mean, in the sense that I try to stay as far away from any politics as possible, but I am very much a project person and I find on this strictly project level that the successive people without competences who come from the subsequent parties, the only thing they do is to stay in power for a while. And we, entrepreneurs, because we are aware that yes, we manage something, we even manage very large businesses, very often we manage very large amounts of money, so we have these management competencies, we have an obligation, it's not a right, it's an obligation to demand more from governments than everyone else, because perhaps in the good sense of the word, mediocre means, with all due respect, an employee who constantly performs the same repeated task, has neither the competence, nor the time, nor the strength, is exhausted by performing the same repeated task, has no strength to fight the system. But we entrepreneurs have an obligation to fight the system, not the state. I distinguish this very clearly. With the system, not with the state. The state is ours, we are the state's. We must take care of it and its sovereignty, right, with all our beings, because entire generations of us have given their blood and lives so that we would have something to manage. But now we simply have to take responsibility for this management, because as you can see, the authorities are completely unable to cope with it. Perhaps penalties should be introduced for officials who make decisions. Absolutely yes. Penalties should definitely be introduced. This is another of my petitions that I have articulated several times. I believe that financial penalties and misdemeanor and criminal penalties should be introduced for officials at a certain level. Not that it should be for every official, because then it would work in such a way that responsibility is always transferred to the lowest official or the middle-level official, but only to those officials who issue administrative decisions. These are always some mayors, presidents, ministers, deputy ministers, department directors, because if I extend this responsibility to judges as well, but first I will focus on these officials. I believe that two types of official responsibility should be introduced. The first is financial, and the second is precisely this, let's call it generally criminal, although partially misdemeanor. Why financial? In what cases? In general, in such cases when the decisions, i.e. administrative decisions, are of a contra-legitimate nature. What does contralegem mean? This means that if the regulations state that a, and the official reads the same regulation and states that it says bh no, then this is a contralege. Such judgments, such decisions, but also court rulings are categorically prohibited in Polish law. are categorically prohibited, I emphasize this once again , there are at least 14 Supreme Court rulings on this subject , at least two rulings of the Constitutional Tribunal. 100% of legal doctrine states that they are categorically prohibited and if we read the Constitution of the Republic of Poland we will also see that it is prohibited. To put it bluntly, officials are breaking the law. This is simply a gigantic amount, but it is astronomical, I will soon tell you how I perceive it in percentage terms. administrative decisions and judgments of administrative courts, provincial administrative courts, local government courts, appeal boards, which administrative decisions and judgments are contrary to the content of the regulations. Yes, completely in opposition. In my life, it so happens that I work in administrative proceedings every day and, to put it colloquially, I have worked through and processed several thousand such proceedings in my life . Therefore, I have something to say on this subject. This is not, no, this is not, it is not, 2 5 15, we are talking about thousands. A huge part of the administrative decisions and rulings of the National Administrative Court and subsequent rulings of the NWSA are contralege based on inferences contra legegem, i.e. in opposition to the content of the norm. So what ? And nothing happened. Both this and that, and as long as what can an entrepreneur do? Imagine that an entrepreneur wants to organize, for example, a shooting range. Let's assume I want to organize a shooting range and I want to, let's say, invest a million zlotys in organizing the shooting range, and he organizes this shooting range, and then it turns out that on the basis of an application against legem, which is prohibited in Polish law, I will emphasize again, the mayor, the commune head, the city president refuses to approve the regulations, even though the regulation clearly states that he has such an obligation. And what's happening? The entrepreneur is left with a million zlotys in the bag, to put it colloquially, with a loss. And how many such proceedings are there, how many such cases, and many, not hundreds, not thousands, I think tens of thousands on a Polish scale, and whose decisions are contradictory. Now, what can be done to make officials finally start respecting the letter of the law, the content, the substance of the regulations? must be held accountable because they do not increase any risk with their decisions. None, neither financial nor criminal. There is supposedly a law on the liability of officials, but it is cleverly written so that for an official to be held accountable, he would first have to lose the office, and then the office would have to accuse the official, which will never happen. Therefore, we want to amend this act. Since it is already in place, we want to amend this act and we currently want it so that in every case where the decision is to the detriment of the requesting party, because this is a very important variable, to the detriment of the requesting party based on the basis of the inference versus the legegend, i.e. in opposition to the content of the provision, as it can be understood, the financial responsibility should not be assumed by the office, because then we pay the compensation, we the entrepreneurs, you, me, Ms. Krysia at the cash register, right? And why should we pay for an official who makes a decision against legem? Let him pay for himself. And why criminal liability? And for the same reason, because please note what a contra legegem is and why it is a contra legegem, applying a contra legegem is prohibited, because it is a type of crime, because it means that a democratic state, within a democratic state, social representation has been elected in the form of deputies, senators and a president who will sign the bill, and the official reads this bill and says that he does not like this provision as it is written. He will decide exactly differently what kind of fraud is this and in relation to whom? To the state, to the democratic system, to all of us. We didn't agree on any other content, we just agreed on this exact content. Therefore, he should be held liable for fraud, not for exceeding his powers. True? I looked at the relationship and these demands seem justified to me. I will also extend it to judges, because it cannot be that courts, especially in recent years, especially provincial courts, are administrative, not all judges, so as not to include all of them, because that would be very unfair and very unfair to excellent judges, but a huge part of the rulings in the USA are contra-alleges. We practically never have a week in which we do not have a contra legem decision in our office . This is totally unacceptable because it destroys the foundations of the state. trust in the state. Ladies and gentlemen, 33,000 pages of regulations are created every year. I don't know if the editor is aware, but in Poland we produce an average of 33,000 pages of recipes per year. The exception was 2024, when 37,000 pages of regulations were created . If to pages, not regulations, but pages of regulations. If we do not respect ourselves when reading these regulations, meaning that 33,000 pages will be created every year, 330,000 pages in just a decade, then this is where the burden on us entrepreneurs comes from. We can't find each other anymore. How are we supposed to find our way around 330,000 pages of regulations in 10 years? Nobody knows, there is no law professor who knows 1% of the regulations. This is impossible. Let alone everyone else. we are walking around in this legal soup, these regulations are added to us , and on top of that, officials do not respect what results from the content of the norm itself. So this postulate seems to me to be completely justified and completely coherent. Moreover, as stubbornly and consistently as I will demand its implementation, in my professional life I have repeatedly requested disciplinary proceedings against judges, including once against three Supreme Court judges . And in this respect I am very consistent, because I have nothing against you personally, against the judges, and not against everyone, but I absolutely have something against you professionally, absolutely as a citizen, as a human being, as an ordinary plankton who lives here in this world in our Poland and to whom the constitution guarantees the right to a fair trial. I am asking for this constitutive right of mine, the right to dignity, I am actually asking for mine and everyone else's , because I might be able to take pain, but for the right to dignity of other people. After all, in the cases in which I appear, and these are disciplinary proceedings against judges, I do not appear in my own cases, because I do not conduct them. I always act in other people's affairs, right? I cover this very often, not always sometimes the clients, but I often cover the cost of it. He devotes a huge amount of time, energy, and stress to it, right? There is only one thing in life that we will not have more time. I invest what I have most valuable. I'm going in the name of what? In the name of superior values. If we have agreed on such a democratic state, then I expect that the provision will initially be as we read it and later, when the judge decides on it, it will also be identical, and it will not be modified, it will not be based on the basis of audit conclusions, because otherwise it is unfair. Do you have any information on how many companies have been destroyed due to such actions by officials or judges? No, I don't. Mhm. Maybe it's just populism and maybe poor management of these companies or poor assessment of business risk. Perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps I am wrong. I may not be competent to assess Article 7 77 paragraph 1 and 107 of the Code of Administrative Procedure. Perhaps I'm not the best lawyer, although I think last year our law firm was recognized in one of the competitions as the highest quality in Poland, so maybe I'm wrong. Perhaps I am not teaching my students the principles of legal interpretation correctly, and perhaps I am not teaching my students the principles of law-making techniques correctly. Perhaps I know nothing about lawmaking, even though many regulations in the Polish state, including the most liberal form of employment currently in force in Poland for 9 years, have not been of my authorship. Perhaps I know nothing at all about statehood, but assuming that I have any basic elementary knowledge in this area, I will allow myself to state that the courts and state administration bodies do not follow these rules on a mass scale. I could take it, after all, I have no intention of starting any crusade either with offices or with the courts. I could do anything else in life. I am a very active person. I have many business and scientific projects. I have something to do. It's not that I'm targeting officials because I don't dislike officials. I like people as people. I just expect the rules to be respected. And because every day in our office, in subsequent proceedings, we receive decisions of commune heads, mayors, local governments, colleagues and court rulings that violate the elementary principles that I teach in my studies. Not because I teach, but because that's how they are. I am simply a cog in this puzzle. I teach them what is valid at the level of science, principles, and interpretation of law. And then it is not applied or it is simply that, one could say, these principles are being destroyed at the level of case law. And okay, in this case I am actually fighting for what can be called, from my perspective, the ideal. This is what is most important to me, this consistency, so that what I teach the student can later be applied in his real and everyday life. You run the WGEN law firm, which specializes primarily in servicing the entire TSL industry. This is transport, forwarding, logistics. What problems do drivers and owners of transport companies have today? Well, because these are often small entrepreneurs. It is not uncommon for these very large companies operating on a global scale to be shown in the spotlight. And what problems do these entrepreneurs have? We had a huge impact on shaping the Polish TSL market. With our participation here at work in the G building of the Sejm, a groundbreaking provision was created in the Act on Drivers' Working Time, which stipulated that drivers of trucks who are on a business trip are exempt from contributions and taxation in the scope of the allowance and accommodation allowance. I remember then that the ministry did n't really like this solution, this proposal, because they believed that it would reduce our revenues to the state treasury. Well, because the transport environment is very well organized, including ZMPD, there is true, but also OZPTD, we pushed through this regulation together. What happened? Polish transport has exploded in positive terms. The first highest coefficients in kilometer transport and cabotage in all consecutive years, right? revenues there from 9 times in one year were probably 13% 13.5% of GDP was created by one single industry. Eight such industries would be enough for us. One wise decision, but also one wise decision resulting from conviction, determination and association within associations across the transport industry. So what happened now? And then came the so-called EU mobility package, which had only one goal. Finish off Polish transport, Polish Romanian transport. there was no other purpose there. These so-called, um, this mobility package was introduced , the so-called sectoral wages were introduced , i.e. the former minimum wages and there, among other things, the Polish legislator, for some unknown reason, probably without any deeper and without deeper reflection, introduced a provision into the Drivers' Working Time Act that drivers cannot be on business trips. This means that drivers employed under employment contracts cannot now be paid allowances and lump sums for overtime payments that were exempt from contributions and taxation, which means that de facto the entire salary is now subject to contributions and taxation, which means that Polish transport is no longer profitable, which means that it is in a catastrophic situation. Polish companies are very diverse, from very tiny, one-person companies to huge ones, right, with 1,000 employees and more. And I hope that as many of these as possible were large, so that they would become bigger and bigger, but they have no chance of becoming bigger now, because anti-quality has just been created in terms of the conditions for running a business. And who did it? Officials, well, it was the officials of the Ministry of Labor who did it. I went to meetings with Deputy Minister Gajewski, he is from the left, and I asked: "Mr. Minister, there were five of these officials at that meeting." I say: "Mr. Minister, what have you done? You've just killed the goose that lays the golden eggs." And the minister lectured me there for about 8 minutes. First he invited me to a meeting which I requested, and then he lectured me for 8 minutes. He didn't listen to what I wanted to say, he just pontificated about what he wanted to tell me, right? Because the minister, being a minister who has worked at a university all his life, knows better than entrepreneurs who have been doing this all their lives, so he pontificated to me for those 8 minutes. How the left will now equalize the rules of social coexistence, how it was bad for workers and now they are contributing everything to the estate. I say: "Minister, maybe I 'm not as well educated as you are. I don't have the same competence as you, but I've been running a business here for 26 years . I've been serving this industry, right, 26 years. I know it perfectly. My parents ran a transport company for 11 years. I know it from every possible angle. I can tell you that there 's such a thing in labor law as frictional unemployment, and in legal doctrine, it's considered the most dangerous type of labor law. It most often occurs in agriculture. So, when we have the harvest season, there's always a shortage of workers, but when there's no harvest season, there's hidden unemployment. People have nothing to live on, and the transport system has pumped out this hidden unemployment, the frictional unemployment, the most destructive unemployment, from the countryside. What did he do? He pumped in enormous amounts of money at the same time, because compared to a driver's salary, it's 9,10,000 złoty. He pumped in enormous amounts of money. So, into the countryside, where we had poverty, Because I come from the village of Koryczany and now I also live in the village of Kogutek, and I'm a normal country boy. Back then, especially in the 1990s, right? Unimaginable poverty. People don't realize how poor it was. And luckily, he pumped a huge amount of money into our country through this transport system. He eliminated unemployment. Why? Because the net income could be very high. Because the net income was high. Because the gross income was low. The gross income was low. Because of that, the net income could be high, so people got money in their hands . Cash for deliveries. I mean, not cash, but cash , right? Is that wrong? It's brilliant. It was the best social project. It was the best social project. But the minister will now be sitting there, never having to earn a single złoty because he received it from the budget or a salary from the university, and the university received it from the budget, and they think this money falls from the sky. They do n't know where it comes from. I guarantee you, if you asked 100 out of 100 officials, I guarantee you that 90 don't know where the money even comes from. How is it that they have any salaries, because they think there's actually some kind of budget for some kind of budget? And this face, and I explain this to the minister. Imagine, six months have passed since that meeting. Complete silence, and I'm just asking for the reinstatement of regulations that have pumped more money into the state budget. No, they pumped more, made us competitive, created our well-being. I'm standing up for our well-being. Am I not standing up for it? I don't own a transport company, I don't benefit in any way from the fact that I spent a day traveling to Warsaw, spent 1,000 złoty to get there, get back, and so on. After all, no one's paying me for this, I just see that something in the state isn't working. So I go and talk. But the ministry clearly has some kind of discomfort, perhaps with me about the previous law I introduced. This is a harvest assistance agreement. I legally implemented the collection into the Polish legal system. Nine years ago, I implemented the agreement within another association, so please note that I'm doing all of this within the association. I heartily encourage you, and the editor, to establish associations as well. I'll help and explain how it's done, and why the power lies in associations, because few people know that, by law, associations have certain special prerogatives and powers that mean they not only can, but must, participate in legislative proceedings. But that's for another occasion, if the editor would like. However, nine years ago, farmers came to me, like peasants to peasants, and said: "Listen, you 're the lawyer there, specializing in law, and here we are, we produce soft fruit." Um, blueberries are, listen, the situation is catastrophically bad . Well, here we are, I don't know if we'll survive, we have nothing to feed our children. We literally have nothing to feed our children with, so save us. And I say, "Well, what's the problem?" The man says, "Well , listen, the state has inundated us with inspections from the National Labor Inspectorate and they're fining us several thousand zlotys if we don't hire based on an employment contract." And he says, if I hired based on an employment contract, the costs are such that no one will buy me blueberries, and more importantly, in the store, every consumer, every one of you watching us, you would have to pay twice as much for blueberries. Well, you'll pay twice as much, no. So he says, come up with something. Well, I'm saying, listen, I've been thinking about this for a few years now , I have this idea, I haven't had anything to attach it to, a special contract, a civil law contract that would have a very high net income and a very low Grossing up, we'll put it in a special section that allows for that possibility. No one believed it. You know, apart from me and the president of that tiny association, who only believed it because he was standing against the wall and the roller was crushing him, he couldn't breathe anymore, no one believed it. But we went to the ministry and proposed the content I proposed, which is extremely liberal. Later, the ministries fought with me at these meetings and sessions, because they were fighting, who knows what they were fighting for, but when they saw a man who wanted to introduce some freedom in taxes and social security, they decided to attack me. But you know, I 'm battle-hardened, they don't impress me in the slightest. Therefore, I won those battles. I convinced the minister there in the ministry . Through preparations, I convinced a sufficient number of MPs. I convinced representatives of Solidarity and individual farmers, who supported me, and we passed the procedure. At that time, the Prime Minister said, That he wouldn't implement such an agreement because the trade unions would be opposed. So I went and arranged a meeting with the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister was sitting on your side, and the Deputy Prime Minister was sitting on your side. I said, "Prime Minister, I'll have the bill ready in a few weeks; I've been working on it for several months." I invested my own money, my time, my emotions, my energy, a lot of work, meetings at the ministerial level, and you want to block it from me . Therefore, we will do this. In a few weeks you have local elections. Therefore, I will honestly go to the media and say that several million farmers will not be able to take advantage of this advantageous form of employment. Well, because that 's the government's decision. The Prime Minister literally said in one sentence, turned to his left and said to the Deputy Prime Minister: "Go through with it." So I've already gotten through the premiere, right? But it turned out that the president did not want to sign it, when the deputies and senators had already voted, everyone understood, the president did not want to sign it, and in fact he only signed it on the last day. I also made an appointment with the president. It took me about an hour and a half there, there was a larger group of people there. There are photos, you can see and verify every element I am talking about here. Ultimately, the president graciously signed this freedom-giving act implementing the most freedom-loving form of employment in the European Union, and moreover, in a civil law form. Regardless of whether we pay a salary of PLN 5, 15, or 50,000 net, generalizing the entire contributions and taxation is PLN 300. Well, there is no more liberal one. Someone would say that this is impossible. And we just took it and did it. First we came up with the idea, we did it, and then it was even attacked by the European Commission. I prepared a scientific study, sent it to the European Commission and won the European Commission. You are a specialist in labor law, what would you say to people who say: "Let's abolish junk contracts, because Poland, Polish business, is a breeding ground for junk contracts, contracts where people don't have ZUS, don't have, won't have in the future a pension, and so on. Ladies and gentlemen, if you ever hear from any politician that civil law contracts are junk contracts, you can be 100% sure that they are incompetent, that they have no idea about the basics. Civil law contracts - I wrote a book on this topic about civil law contracts and the characteristics of civil law contracts, especially contracts of mandate. Besides, I am also the author of a very liberal form of employment in road transport. A contract for the provision of vehicle driving services is a civil law contract and it brings huge savings for employment in this formula. But be careful, this is a zero-sum game, not at the expense of the employee. Not at the expense of the employee. Now, what no one is talking about - a contract of mandate and an employment contract are almost identical in terms of Its structure, and I don't mean the content, but the mathematical structure. The contributions, the amount of contributions, and, as I say colloquially, the names of the contributions, i.e., the types, are identical in the employment contract as in the contract of mandate. Identical, not similar, identical. The percentage components, the percentage coefficients for calculating these contributions are, note, identical, not similar, identical to those in the employment contract. So why do ministers come out uncritically, thoughtlessly, and without any competence, hesitantly, saying that this is a junk contract, when it has all the same coefficients? The only difference is that one of the components, one of the contributions, is voluntary or not, but it happens to be the least important, yet the cheapest. So they are identical. Now let's move on. And what about the wages with the establishment of a guaranteed minimum wage? Perhaps they are junk at the minimum wage level? Well, let's check it out, let's convert it to an hourly rate. They are much more favorable. How do we calculate the hourly rate of the contract? Civil law versus hourly wage employment contracts, it turns out that the minimum wage under a mandate contract is higher, significantly higher than the minimum wage under an employment contract. Ladies and gentlemen, what's the point? The point is to eliminate the right to choose. The point is to eliminate the right to choose. And if you eliminate the right to choose whether you employ someone under an employment contract or a civil contract, then you can shape and manage the entire population under that employment contract. People will no longer escape the system. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a grave insult to my mentors, the professors who developed contracts, mandate contracts, and contracts for specific work. It's a grave insult to us, the academic community, labor lawyers, to say that we have produced rubbish contracts. I mean, what, do we have rubbish minds and are so intellectually limited that we have developed some solutions that are rubbish? Is this a grave insult to the entire community of civil lawyers? Because labor law is part of civil law, and these contracts fall under the section on obligations, which is strictly in the Civil law, parts of civil law, and in connection with the civil law branch. Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, this is a grave insult to those who understood that in some cases, civil contracts are better suited and adapted than employment contracts, and vice versa. Civil contracts are more flexible for employees , a fact few people realize. They are much more flexible, much more convenient in many respects. So whenever you hear someone say that a civil contract is a junk contract, you can immediately see, instead of their face, that they are a person without any basic competences. This is a characteristic of labor ministers. I remember once, on Polish Radio's first program, but that was many years ago, and it affected many governments, a woman, I remember, the former labor minister, saying that these are junk contracts. I remember calling them on air and saying live: "Minister, do you have any idea what the contributions and taxes on this contract are? Do you know they're identical?" She fell silent, she had nothing to say. And you see, you understand why I'm demanding that ministers and department directors be people who have at least 10 years of experience in business, because if he had been in business for 10 years, he would have had to hire employees in some way or another; he would have learned about labor law, even if he weren't a lawyer. But these are people without basic training, for some reason they usurp the right to manage the state and departments when they have no proof of their competence. The day before our conversation, information appeared in the media that this act on the National Financial Stability Fund (KSF) may be inconsistent with EU law, because it turns out that one of the directives indicates that the VAT invoice we submit, or the information for VAT settlement, does not require the state to interfere so much with the content of the document we have. Do you believe that the act on the KSF was actually processed and passed without knowledge of EU directives? Absolutely. Not only that, I believe so, but I wouldn't be surprised in the slightest , because I have identical experiences. It was the same five years ago in transport. If you wanted to hire an employee and delegate them from outside the European Union and delegate them to European Union countries as a driver, so they could drive—simply put, " delegation"—but simply drive behind the wheel. Polish officials from the Ministry of Labor and the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS) came up with the idea that they would have to be provided with a room or apartment. They started proceedings there, citing European Union directives , citing provisions that were supposed to legitimize this solution. You looked into it, I already had many years of experience, having worked with European Union law for years . Besides, I changed many of them at the European Parliament level . I knew that usually it was these Polish officials who didn't read these regulations carefully enough or overinterpreted them. So we took the Polish version, we took the French, English, and German versions. And to our surprise, we checked the first version, which we read, which was different from the Polish one, that the content of the provision was different. Later The next, the next, all the content turned out to be different. So we asked for a meeting at the Ministry of Labor. There was an excellent professor from the University of Gdańsk— sorry, I've forgotten the name—a labor lawyer who invited the first president of the Social Insurance Institution (ZUS), Professor Uścińska, to this, this working meeting. And so we started by reading the original versions and saying that it was untrue. Everything you've been working on for months, spending our money and wasting your time and ours, stressing us out, contradicts what 's written there. Everyone was shocked. It turns out that no one had read it, no one understood it properly. There was a translation error. No one bothered to look at the original versions. Minister Zieleniecki, I remember, Minister Zieleniecki said: "Ladies and gentlemen, if you don't mind us being here as a law firm, as an association with the first president of ZUS, could you propose a new solution?" And so it happened. For three weeks, we worked within our framework. Law firm, we proposed completely new rules for the posting of workers and the issuance of A1 documents. They are now 100% the same as we proposed during those three weeks in our team and have been in force in Poland for five or six years . They are, and this is an example of how Polish officials, uncritically, without knowledge, without competence, are carrying out some kind of feigned transposition, because it wasn't any transposition at all, it was a concocted, concocted regulation, and they tried to impose the most restrictive regulations on Poles , which did not stem from anywhere and were not applicable anywhere. So I believe this is true, I'm giving one such example. If I thought about it, I could probably give 10 such examples. It was identical in Regulation 561, where Polish supervisory authorities required the European Community to comply with the provisions of the Act of 2006, where Polish supervisory authorities required certain regulations that did not result from the content of this provision. I remember there, I intervened with the European Commission. It's also identical online, you can find it. Check the European Commission's website. It was identical in Regulation 1071 of the European Community from 2009. It was identical. It required Polish entrepreneurs to have some kind of databases and who knows what documents, devices in these transport databases, while when we read the original, it turned out that this was not true. It simply uses the plural form; a screwdriver and a hammer are all that Polish transport companies must have . And they tried to impose a narrative: who tried? The Germans tried, the French tried? The Chinese tried, not Polish officials tried. This is the Republic of bureaucrats. This bureaucratic Republic must end. Dear officials, let me make you understand correctly. I respect you very much . You are wonderful people. I respect you in a human way. I don't want to deprive you of even the slightest right to dignity or unworthiness, because you are people just like us entrepreneurs. Just understand that everything you receive, 100% of your remuneration, comes from us, from us entrepreneurs, from us entrepreneurs of SMEs, large enterprises. entrepreneurs and state-owned companies, but the Polish state doesn't have any extraordinary resources, I don't know, diamond deposits there to trade in. So we have to earn this money for you and treat us, treat us with dignity and respect, because we work titanic hours for 16, 18 hours. When you're asleep, we're still working. When you, when you wake up and go to work, we've been working for a long time. When you have vacations, we work. When you have weekends, we work. Because we're constantly working. Running a business, especially for the past seven years, has become increasingly difficult . Yesterday, one of my colleagues told me that entrepreneurs, it's become dramatically harder to run a business in seven years. Just seven years. Are you saying where this comes from? I say, listen, this is consistent with my research, that 33,000 pages of regulations are produced annually. Well, they're adding to the soup. This is inconsistent with each other. And that's why, ladies and gentlemen, we decided here, together with the academic community, including those from the Wrocław University of Science and Technology, and Professor Krokewicz, to develop a new deterministic system for legal interpretation and semantic representation of law. This means a ready-made, partially IT system that immediately makes us independent from officials, and in a sense, also independent from courts. It doesn't mean there won't be any judges, but it makes it probable that, as I read this provision in this context today, it has a defined scope of meaning, and in a year or two, it will have the same scope for Judge X, Y, Z, or any official . It's possible to live in such a country where we know what awaits us. It's impossible to live in a country where regulations are constantly being added. Yesterday, Mr. Brzoska, whom I wish the best, because unlike other behemoths, right, in the same industry, he pays taxes, and huge ones at that, and all the others, these other foreign shills, right, are only cheating us all, the state, because each and every one of us. It's a state, so I wish you all the best. But yesterday he dismissed the success because he said we've introduced tacit consent in a number of areas. So, consent is an institution where if an office doesn't issue a decision within a certain time, that decision is implemented by law. Ladies and gentlemen, unfortunately, I had to reply to him with all due kindness that it won't change anything, because I've known this regulation for years. It was first introduced in 2017, although in some industries it was in force much earlier, for example, in transport. Later, in July 2023, it was expanded, and believe me, the overwhelming majority of these tacit consents are not accepted by officials and courts. We have such decisions practically every day. Do you know why? Because they can. Because what happens to an official or a judge if they don't accept such tacit consent? Nothing will happen to them. And that's why, you understand, we've come full circle. That's why I said, to this whole system, to these excellent, positive solutions, Mr. Brzowska and other brilliant initiatives, which I respect, value, and will wholeheartedly support, we must add one more element. Private financial responsibility for officials and criminal liability, because then it will no longer be profitable for them not to apply these regulations. We only expect the right to dignity. We entrepreneurs—because if you were to distill everything I've said here, perhaps I would sometimes get a little emotional—what we, hard- working people, are essentially demanding is the right to dignity, respect, and the right to dignity from this state, not to crush us, to bury us, to muddy us, to torment us as entrepreneurs and our entire segment of society. Could it be that KSf is like the Polish Order, where officials will have to withdraw from this idea? I unquestionably believe they should withdraw from the Polish Order, from the remnants of that Polish Order, which was a disaster, and I warned them in every way I could that the then- government will withdraw from this disaster, and from the KSEU as well. But I think it's good that they are withdrawing. This KSEW and the entire Polish Order worked, and it's good that the previous government increased these mandates to astronomical levels, and this one improved them even further, introduced even more restrictive ones. Very good. These governments did it. Everything in life has a purpose, and everything serves some greater purpose. Do you know why it's good? Yes, we suffer here and now from all these orders, KSEFs, mandates from one political party, mandates from another political party, but we've woken up. We've had enough. We're not here to be robbed, to be constantly abused, to be trained in every possible way so that we become like trained dogs, who, when they tell us we need to be vaccinated, we'll get vaccinated just because some authority told us to. And, incidentally, those who told us to get vaccinated a few years ago have been stigmatized by the entire world for two or three days now. I hear you, right? Because it turned out that these bastions of wisdom and ethics, right, it turned out, That barbarity and crimes were being committed on some island, and these people are ruling us, and it's great that it worked. We'll abolish these outrageous fines, too. Outrageous fines. Who saw it coming, taking away someone's entire salary in a single fine? Who saw it coming, introducing regulations that if you have two hundred points on a regular hundred, anywhere in front of an office building, they'll take away your driver's license. Because if you look at 15 points, there are three to 15, they can give you 15, on the second 15, you're effectively disqualified from practicing your profession, because for many people, it's a profession; it's not just pleasure or convenience. Who's implementing this? Who's ruling us? Where do these people come from? Where do they even get these ideas to train us? You know, this is a bigger problem. This isn't just a problem of the KSEF. It's good that this has been brought to light, because now we're saying enough is enough. Now we're going to unite, to unite. I'll be chasing all possible associations. Everyone I know will be involved. I'll commit all my resources to this, and I have quite a lot of them. I've gathered them over the past 26 years to overturn this concept, too, but not to overturn it against the state, so that it does n't resonate against the state, to overturn it in a structure where it's against us, against citizens and our dignity. But something more. Now we'll go further, now we'll do something more, we won't stop at the ksef, now it's all about us. Now we'll articulate all the inconveniences one by one. We'll inundate the government with petitions. We'll create new quality and value based on associations. We'll organize an association, which I've been doing for years, and now we'll do it with ten times greater force and change the image of our country. It's not a state of officials and politicians, and who cares, right? It is our state . But do you really believe that entrepreneurs will be able to mobilize so much and oppose all this? This has also been said since the pandemic, that entrepreneurs are supposed to be to stand up to the government, then, when the Polish order was coming into force, to stand up to it too . But somehow, there's no sign of this mass uprising. It all happens so that entrepreneurs say: "We have to mind our own business. We do not have time to get involved in such decisions and initiatives that are often considered political. And brilliant. Let entrepreneurs be there to do business, there are business associations for conversation and dialogue with the government, and each association carries out its own task in its own area, in its own part of its own mission. The entrepreneur has to pay a membership fee and basically has to support him and tell him what problems concern him. And the self-government apparatus of this association at the level of this association, the association's board, does the job. What else am I doing? These 400 petitions, you think they were written by some of my lawyers. If everyone goes to bed, including officials and politicians and the Prime Minister, and the Prime Ministers, and there were also Prime Ministers, they go to bed and they sleep soundly, then I stay up at night and write another petition and I have had 400 such, right, yes, I wrote 400 such interventions by the overwhelming majority, and they were effective. Now let's multiply that by 2 times 10 x 100. Entrepreneurs are there to do business. Associations are there to represent interests, but really represent them. I am on the council of this spokesman for small and medium-sized enterprises. Under the previous spokesman, I must honestly say that it was Mr. Abramovich. He was supposedly, well, formally a government minister, but honestly speaking, he was a man in strong opposition to the government. He was a man who fought without any sentiment whatsoever. As if one could say he was fighting for something non- politically. I never fight any government politically. For me, anyone can rule, as long as they rule wisely, and then it is my government. If it governs wisely, it is my government, and if it governs badly, it is not mine, and without regard for colors. What does this mean? So now we, as entrepreneurs, are only obliged to establish associations, organize associations, and then these associations must speak the language of law. But I will help you, I have been doing it for so many years, I know how to do it. I have experience. If you don't know how to organize an association, but don't know how to manage it later, or you don't know how to prepare petitions effectively, or if you do n't know how to participate in the legislative process, or if you need to be invited to committee meetings or work in a ministry, I'll help you. I've been doing this for over 16 years, I have extensive experience, and I also learned from my mentors. I surpassed them, and we will achieve this success. The 99% are supposed to go into business. So that we have good roads, hospitals, so that we are strong, so that we have our own rockets, airplanes, everything, so that we have sovereignty, build our own sovereignty, and the 1%, the truth, works for the good of all in the form of associations. And that's the formula, right? There is no such thing as a general uprising, why mass levies? We do, and they are effective in agriculture, but less and less so . Um, I co-organized several roadblocks in Szegociny with my brothers, with my family, with my sister-in-law, right? And during the so-called Kaczyński five, which was a terrible decision and law for Polish agriculture. Unfortunately, it was pushed through under this government, which is completely bizarre. And then, among other things, we blocked the roads when thousands of tons of mold were imported from Ukraine. After all, it wasn't any grain, it was pure mold, which causes carcinogenic effects, right, i.e. cancer is the main factor, and the second such factor is infertility. And we ate it all, and we would have eaten even more if we hadn't blocked the roads. But this formula, although it was effective for years, even decades, is wearing thin because the world has changed. the world began to become legal. I mean, we even breathe law and we have to fight with such instruments. We must not only fight, we must take our own as citizens. This is our right under the constitution. We are not fighting for anything at all. Maybe even a bad word, that we simply take what is due to us from this system and this constitution, from this structure that we agreed upon when creating this constitution. So what legal instruments? Because this is the most effective method of conversation and dialogue. Well, that's the way the world is now. Well, we have to speak in tongues. Well, what if one spoke Chinese and the other Portuguese, they wouldn't get along. Well, here we have the government issuing regulations, we have to speak in their language. And what kind of deregulation is this, if we're talking about it, because it still bothers me , what kind of deregulation is this, when 33,000 regulations are created, pages of regulations are created every year. What kind of deregulation are we talking about? To regulate some effectively, we could say that if one person were to create 33,000 and 66,000 were to be destroyed, right? Well, what level of falsehood is there when we, the citizens, are deceived, right? What message is this? We created some kind of deregulation commission here and they're throwing out 33,000 pages of regulations, but we created a regulatory commission that introduced something there , which is completely ineffective, even as in the example I showed, but we'll add 33,000 to you next year. You can't live like this. Ladies and gentlemen, I say this as a lawyer. I say this as a legal practitioner. The law is overwhelmingly about bars and restrictions. do not fall into the trap that the more law you have, the more justice you will have. You won't have it, because physics already has a well-known pattern. Well, there is a so- called principle of the law of chaos. The more quantifiers you have in a system that are not engineered together , the more chaos you have , the less law and authority and order you have. Because law, if we were to call it in one word, is order. This is not a mess. So the more you put into the system, the more quantifiers that are not connected to each other , the more chaos there is, the more disorder there is. And the only, the only function of law is order. And this means that if there is no order, our fundamental right to dignity is violated at the level of human rights, the first generation of human rights. There is no more important human right, and interestingly enough, it is not the right to life or freedom, but the right to dignity that is the number one human right. So the more chaos, the less our dignity. It has been written in legal doctrine for years that we have a system of legal inflation. I mean, people don't use it. What are they supposed to be used for? Now try to get home from this podcast . You will see how many regulations you will violate. You will inadvertently violate it. How autonomous verification systems will be introduced . We will simply be like monkeys in a circus who will be punished every day for something, with points and such . Why is this done? Essentially, this is done because people are nonconformists by nature and the system wants them to be conformists. I want them to be , to be submissive, to listen, to be under some kind of pressure all the time, to keep their heads down, to be afraid to even sign a petition because maybe someone will come in and arrest them, right? You have to get this off your chest. It is necessary to take into account a very large role of Poland. You see, the European Union, the countries of the European Union, have completely failed to cope with this . There was a false narrative about welcoming immigration. Where is Sweden? There is no Sweden. Where is France? Go to Paris. Enter the ninth district. What a disaster. This is a disaster. Only Paris looks totally different than it looks in the movies. It has nothing to do with anything . Painted in the barbed wire. 70% are black or of various colors. Women don't wear dresses at all because they are afraid. After 10 p.m., after 11 p.m. you won't see any French people in Paris because they're afraid. Um, ladies and gentlemen, what did this lead to? Go to Germany. There was a time when bicycles stood in front of every house, not attached to anything. Nobody stole anything. Where have those times gone? What happened? Something unimaginably profound has happened at the societal level. People were ironed with this type of decency. Drive slower, don't exceed a kilometer, right? These regulations, including road traffic law, are completely subject to change, and this system of penalties is also in general, so I prepared a petition in this regard literally in a few days. You'll read it, there 's already one, but I took the liberty of preparing a more in-depth one. It's a system of training us, social training, and then such and such societies are defenseless because they see that something is wrong here. They steal, others come with a different religion, they rob, sometimes they even rape, oh my, and we, but we can't react because we are so decent, ladies and gentlemen, this is unimaginable, dangerous, but that's not it , there's no way we're just chatting. There are petitions, it must be immediately, when we define the problem, there must be an order to react immediately. That is why I encourage and invite you to sign my petitions, my writings, which I publish in various places. If the editor requests it, I will provide the link. we know, we will do it in the link in the description. It is important that we act, ladies and gentlemen, the order to react. We have now defined the problem, and now we need to move on to the response. I mean, we have to exert pressure because we are the state. Let's start taking action on this. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thank you also for watching this very interesting conversation. You can find the link to the petition and my guest's contact information in the description. And we'll see you in the next episode.