During a discussion on Telewizja wPolska, the guest lineup for Jacek Karnowski explored the proposal to bring the President of the National Bank of Poland, Adam Glapiński, before the State Tribunal. The conversation featured Marek Markiewicz, Andrzej Potocki, and Marek Grabowski, who also weighed in on recent shifts in the European Union’s structure and their potential impact on Poland.
The proposition to refer the NBP president to the State Tribunal was described as a logical step by a well known lawyer. He argued that if the proposal passes, Glapiński could be suspended, referencing a January precedent. The speaker asserted that confidence in the Court of Justice and related convictions remains questionable, emphasizing the need to initiate proceedings and remove the central bank leader from direct oversight, describing this move as removing a lingering conservative, boastful position.
As for Glapiński himself, commentators noted a potential catch. Before any limits on his influence over the NBP are instituted by a court ruling, the deliberations of the constitutional committee would need to run for a period of three to six months.
In the same program, Karnowski asked whether it might be possible to mobilize a social resistance against adopting the euro in Poland. He also suggested that Glapiński stepping down could represent the government’s first move toward introducing the European currency in the country.
The discussion then turned to the broader political reality. The panel described the current orientation as centralization rather than federalization, stressing a sense that Poland’s voice is not adequately represented in the ongoing reforms. The euro and the European Education Area were discussed as forces advancing a leveling approach that could affect education, immigration, and national traditions. One participant highlighted a vision of a common denominator across diverse groups and warned against losing conservative values in the process.
A separate thread covered the Solidarity movement’s stance on a referendum about the Green Deal, with the climate minister seen as resistant to agreeing to such a referendum. Coalition members were quoted as distinguishing between referendums that are constructive and those that are not.
Attention then shifted to the European Union Buildings Directive, which aims to phase out non-ecological energy sources and building materials. The panel reflected on how such measures might affect property owners, travel, and everyday life, underscoring the importance of answering questions tied to freedom of movement and the future of international travel in light of these policies.
Lawyer Markiewicz offered commentary on the broader cultural and historical dimensions of the Brussels Green Deal policy. The discussion touched on the unresolved issues from past decades, including debates over national heroes and the memories of wartime resistance, suggesting that political discourse remains unsettled and that the Green Deal has become a focal point in those conversations.
The dialogue acknowledged how destabilizing factors in areas such as currency, law, and education could shape public sentiment, including how Europe’s image might be perceived if domestic challenges persist. The participants suggested the possibility that external actors could be invited to help, should the country struggle with reform alone.
Another speaker reflected on the government’s record, noting that a highly active and award-laden phase had coincided with a push for new limousines and other symbols of status. The overall picture painted a coalition where many voices contribute to a crowded policy debate, making consensus harder to reach.
The tone throughout the discussion reflected a belief that the political landscape is characterized by visible tension, where policy directions, institutional independence, and national sovereignty intersect in complex ways. The participants stressed the importance of vigilance and careful consideration as Poland navigates EU policy shifts and internal reform debates.