Sławomir Mentzen in his author's program Mentzen grills:
– Members of the PiSu and Platform have proven that they reason in this way that it is not crucial for them what is voted on, but who reported the thing that is voted on. And here is an example of the vote of the bill, which was to frost energy prices for consumers in Poland, so that from January you would not pay an awful lot, even for electricity.
This bill that we voted on was practically identical to that bill that the Law of Law of Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law and Law. PiS wrote the bill a year ago, now Platform took it. And what is important, last year the Platform had a number in the Sejm, but most in the Senate.
Therefore, they proposed in the legislature an amendment to guarantee that those entities entitled to cheaper energy were besides heat-operated in cooperatives. That is, if a housing cooperative has its own tiny heating plant, then that people who are in the cooperative should not gotta pay more for the heat than people who are in the average cooperative. It's perfectly obvious. There is no reason to separate between these 2 beings.
And Platform Senators picked up that any farms would be affected and proposed specified an amendment to this bill. A year ago, the legislature accepted this amendment, addressed it to the Sejm, and in the Sejm the writers rejected this amendment.
The Platformers supported it and we besides supported it due to the fact that it was right. That was a year ago. It's been a year and the PiSu Act is now filing the Platform. We are proposing an amendment precisely the same as the 1 the Platform had previously tabled and against which the Law and Justice Office was against a year ago. He now started to support it, and the Platform, which had tabled this amendment a year ago and supported it, was now against it.
We were in favour again, of course, due to the fact that it was precisely the same amendment, precisely the same bill, and I don't realize why the writers were against it last year. It's the right amendment, and I don't realize why they were all of a abrupt in favour of the platformers who were in favour last year, now they were against it? It doesn't make any sense.
To these people it does not substance whether what they are voting is right or wrong, but it does substance who tabled this amendment. Writers report, platformers object. The platformers study that the writers are against.
It is perfectly average that sometimes both have sensible things that they propose, and then specified sensible things simply request to be supported. I thus realize the politics of Parliament that we will support what is right, vote against what is wrong, regardless of who proposes these laws.
I can even imagine – I know it's hard – but I can imagine that, for example, the Left 1 day will say something wise and study any sensible amendment. I know I got carried distant with discipline fiction, but say something like this happened. Of course I'll support that.
An example? Katarzyna Lubnauer of Modern, of the Civic Platform says that she would very much like the taxation of Belka to be abolished, as the Platform announced during the election campaign. But unfortunately, the left doesn't agree. Well, I'm thinking. The platform is all the time, they say they're behind. In the election campaign, they were in favour of abolishing the Belka tax. The 3rd Road in the election run said they were in favour of abolishing the Belka tax. The Left is against, but the Confederacy is besides in favour of abolishing the Belka tax. If the Confederate's votes are added to the Platform's votes and to the 3rd Way's votes, we have a majority in the Sejm, so study this draft Act on the abolition of the Belka taxation or on the limitation of the Belka tax. We'll be happy to support that. It doesn't substance that you're proposing it, not us. There's a good design, it should be voted on. Even if the left will not like it and this is the way to proceed.
It doesn't substance who reports the right project. If the task is right, we support it.
