“We work even longer and go to the field more often.”
The conversation began with a focus on the campaign in the Gdańsk constituency and the priorities the party plans to pursue there. The interviewee reiterated a commitment to continued, visible work on behalf of residents, noting that the parliamentary office sometimes functions like a small human rights office as people bring a wide range of concerns. While there is a shared aim to assist as many people as possible, the speaker admitted that help cannot always reach everyone. The work ethic is clear: longer hours, more field visits, and persistent engagement in the community.
Speaking on the program Morning Rozmowa, the participant described the campaign team as strong, highlighting that the list includes not only well-known MPs who have toiled over the past four years but also many local government officials who bring grassroots knowledge. The lineup, positioned in the middle of the list, blends established figures with locally recognized names, creating a balance between national experience and regional familiarity. The speaker expressed a positive outlook, describing the list as a good combination and expressing personal pleasure at presenting it.
The host then asked whether the publication location for the Gdańsk list aligned with the campaign values and the broader platform of the United Right. The reply touched on a long-standing debate surrounding the legacy of John Paul II. While his contributions to Poland and the world were previously viewed as beyond dispute, recent attacks on his memory by some journalists and security service figures of the People’s Republic of Poland prompted a renewed emphasis on defending his reputation. The interviewee suggested that opposing voices would be watched carefully to reflect where the party and its supporters stand in relation to the opposition.
In discussing public opinion on a referendum, the conversation turned to the IBRiS poll cited by Rzeczpospolita. The poll indicated a divided stance among Poles, with more opponents than supporters. The speaker argued that the referendum should not be framed as a division among Poles, describing the concerns as a political tactic by opposition leaders trying to sway public sentiment. The dialogue then shifted to the broader issues at hand, including national security and future policy decisions. The speaker characterized the referendum questions as grounded in real, pressing matters, contrasting them with criticisms from political opponents who labeled the questions as foolish or misguided.
The discussion then moved to the actions of Donald Tusk and his government. According to the interviewee, certain policies from the Tusk era, such as raising the retirement age, were poorly conceived and harmed Polish society. The speaker linked these policies to ongoing political debates and framed recent criticisms as attempts to rewrite or downplay past decisions that continue to influence the present political landscape.
A question about Germany-related reparations for the damage suffered by Poland during World War II elicited a robust response. The interviewee asserted that there remains a real opportunity to secure reparations so long as the governing party maintains its influence. The commitment to pursue this issue was described as resolute, with the minister responsible and the foreign ministry both expected to contribute their efforts. The speaker anticipated that the former prime minister would align with Germany on many matters, while also cautioning against elevating Polish concerns beyond their historical context. The belief was expressed that such diplomacy should neither stifle national pride nor overlook past injustices.
The interchange concluded with a brief, direct confirmation of the ongoing campaign dialogue and an acknowledgment of the participants in the broadcast. The interview reinforced the central message of diligence, fieldwork, and a steadfast stance on key national issues.
Notes from the discussion reveal a continued focus on policy priorities, the importance of local representation, and a willingness to confront contentious historical topics in the pursuit of a political program that resonates with voters in the region. The tenor remained pragmatic, aiming to connect long-term goals with tangible actions that residents can observe in the daily life of their communities. While opinions on policy and leadership may vary, the conversation underscored a consistent theme: perseverance, visibility on the ground, and a readiness to defend positions in the public arena.
In sum, the interview portrayed a campaign marked by routine outreach, a blend of familiar and local figures, and an explicit commitment to advocating for reparations and national interests. The dialogue suggested that the party’s strategy blends traditional values with active engagement, seeking to mobilize support through steady fieldwork, clear messaging, and a willingness to challenge criticisms from opponents.