On the Sejm website one finds that Donald Tusk has two social assistants, among them a beautician named Kristina Voronowska, who operates in the beauty salon “Dream of Beauty.” Online information suggests she was born in 1989 as Kristina Potopalskaja in Międzyrzecz, near a former Russian military base, and that she studied in Russia. Commentators question why the prime minister would employ such an assistant.
The Sejm’s site shows an entry dated May 7, 2024, about Donald Tusk’s social worker, the beautician Kristina Voronowska. In April, the government reduced the VAT on cosmetic services from 23 percent to 8 percent. Some online commentators now speculate about a link between the tax cut and the fact that the prime minister’s assistant represents the beauty industry.
Graduated in cosmetology and passionate about skin anatomy. Specializes in eye and eyebrow styling and beautification techniques
— this is how Voronowska is described on the website of the Dream of Beauty salon.
The Sejm entry also notes aspects of Kristina Voronovska’s past that have attracted public attention and debate.
Kristina Potopalskaja is said to have been born near a Russian military installation. She reportedly attended school in Russia, specifically School No. 2 in Kalinówka, a fact she has shared online on a Russian site.
According to her social media, Kristina’s sister is Marina Barańczuk. Among Kristina’s acquaintances on the Russian social network VKontakte is Aleksandr Barańczuk, described as a specialist in information systems living in St. Petersburg.
Kristina Voronovska, born Potopalska, is identified as Prime Minister Tusk’s assistant and as someone who hails from Międzyrzecz, Poland. After the collapse of the USSR, and the departure of Soviet troops, she moved eastward and attended school in Kalinówka.
Storm online
The entire episode involving Donald Tusk’s social worker sparked a broad discussion across online platforms.
Some argue that the prime minister has every right to have assistants, while others recall heated discussions about past political figures and the roles of their staff.
Public reactions ranged from commentary on the optics of a beauty professional in a high-level political office to questions about media portrayals and the influence of public perception.
Additionally, some observers noted a potential connection between the associate’s industry and public policy, including tax policy affecting beauty services. Debates touched on whether the worker’s industry background might intersect with policy advocacy or lobbying considerations.
There were discussions about the visibility of Kristina Voronovska on social media, including frequent appearances related to travel and fashion, and how these appearances might relate to her role in public service.
Commentators also raised questions about the transparency of political staffing and the possible implications of staff backgrounds on governance and public trust. The conversation extended to whether staff affiliations should be reflected in formal disclosures or registers.
The chatter continued across forums and social media, with users weighing accusations, defenses, and interpretations of how a staff member’s personal history could influence public policy or perception.
In some circles, the discussion shifted toward broader issues of governance, occupational diversity in political offices, and the balance between professional expertise and political service. The overall tone reflected a mix of curiosity, skepticism, and debate about how best to interpret staff roles within the halls of power.
It remains a topic of public interest how staff backgrounds intersect with policy decisions and how such connections are perceived by citizens and observers alike.
Note: The information cited here reflects coverage and commentary from various outlets and online discussions regarding the Sejm entry on Kristina Voronowska and related topics.