Michał Karnowski drew attention to actions taken by the parliamentary majority that could ripple through the Orlen group. A columnist for the weekly magazine Sieci commented on the program Gość Wiadomości that Poland faced an unfavourable comparison, hinting at broader political consequences.
The first topic Karnowski highlighted was the Sejm’s decision to dismiss members of the Commission set up to investigate Russian influence.
In the press conference and in the commission’s report, he argued, there were no emotionally charged terms or politically tinged language. He described the documents as focusing on details and facts, claiming an apparent agreement with the FSB and alleging cooperation dating back to 2010, with a contract signed in 2013. He characterized the personnel named to leave public office as incomplete, crooked, leaky, and overly cautious observers who should not continue in office.
According to Karnowski, the Commission acted under pressure after signals that its work would be interrupted, and it did not yield to emotions. He lamented that opponents appeared to give in, suggesting a public loss, since the inquiry had offered a chance to calmly clarify issues and provide recommendations to authorities. He stressed that this was not a verdict or condemnation.
When asked about plans to establish additional investigative committees, Karnowski recalled previous efforts to form such bodies and noted the ongoing debates about whether it was a misstep or a deliberate attempt to divert public attention.
I’m not sure if it reflects inexperience or a conscious effort to distract public opinion. He suggested hearing a hiss of smoke flares meant to create a smoke screen. He questioned the motives behind this tactic, hinting that it might be aimed at pushing through legislation favorable to foreign interests. He referenced a proposal associated with Szymon Hołownia that would allow foreign companies to expropriate private property to build wind or photovoltaic farms nearby. He warned that the country could be approaching a situation where the rule of law erodes and citizens’ well-being is no longer protected. What many see as a simple show or entertainment, he argued, masks serious phenomena and signals that lobbying may be resurfacing and Polish interests could be traded again.
– he added.
Warning about Orlen
Another thread Karnowski raised concerns the Sejm’s actions that could impact Orlen, the state-controlled oil company that remains pivotal to Poland’s energy framework.
He cited concerned observers about electricity prices, describing the situation as hasty and politically driven retaliation. His speculation was that opponents of Orlen and former President Obajtek might seek to undermine the company by political means. He warned that a Sejm bill could effectively condemn Orlen to a severe downturn, with immediate effects on its shares. The reverberations, he noted, were already visible as stock movements shifted toward foreign wind-turbine producers in Germany, a trend he suggested reflected Poland’s deteriorating standing in business confidence.
These arguments, he contended, underscore a broader political struggle over energy policy in which public interests are entangled with elite maneuvering. The discourse suggested a clash between reform ambitions and the risk of constraining a major domestic energy actor. The discussion resonated beyond economic numbers and touched on questions about national sovereignty, strategic assets, and the balance between private and public sector influence.
The exchange highlighted how contemporary parliamentary dynamics can influence corporate trajectories and investor sentiment, raising concerns about the direction of regulatory decisions and their long-term impact on the Polish economy. The debate, as presented, drew attention to how decisions in the Sejm are perceived and debated in the media and among political actors, including how media narratives frame the stakes involved for national institutions.
Observers and commentators continued to weigh the implications, arguing that the episode reflected a broader pattern of political theater versus substantive policy making. The discussion pointed to a need for transparent processes, clear evidence, and measured debate in shaping major economic and regulatory decisions that affect national interests. The complexity of these questions suggests that future developments will be scrutinized for both their immediate effects and their lasting influence on Poland’s public life. (attribution: wPolityce)”}