Honourable Chairmen,

The direction and dynamics of changes in Europe and in the social consciousness of European nations surprised many politicians. This state of affairs has brought about three most important consequences: 1) the need to reevaluate or at least rethink the priorities previously set jointly by EU member states; 2) the launching of a broad debate on the vision of the European Union; 3) strategic decisions concerning the present.

We share the view that the European Union is in crisis and needs to renew its foundations. This was expressed by the authors of the declaration Greater European integration. Way Forward. Systemic resolutions are needed, in order to be able to effectively address key issues. The EU must address issues such as the crisis of the economic model, international terrorism, weak social legitimacy of European institutions. However, there are other challenges, not least in terms of security, resulting from the wars in the EU's immediate neighbourhood.It is also a time of the need to search for a system and order of values in the conditions of clash of civilizations, demographic collapse visible in many member states, growing expectations of the inhabitants of European countries to guarantee justice and dignity. The introduction of the euro has brought not only benefits but also numerous difficulties, visible in many countries.

Decisions on the renewal of the EU can only be taken by the consent of the sovereign states members of the EU and in accordance with the will of the people in our countries - This is a historical challenge, but only such a procedure will give credibility to the European institutions, reduce the democratic deficit and comply with the European tradition. This is undoubtedly a historical challenge, but only such a procedure will lend credibility to the European institutions, reduce the democratic deficit, and be in line with European tradition. The pursuit of consensus and agreement among European states has been the undisputed strength of the European Community.

Declaration Greater European integration is certainly an important document, a significant voice in the discussion, but it cannot be considered a project for the renewal of the European Union. There are insufficient grounds for assuming that the slogan "more EU" will solve the problems described in the declaration and above all eliminate the threats. The result of implementing the idea of "more Union" may be the growth of attitudes reluctant to integration. However, the EU does not need utopia, but rather realism in establishing new solutions.

The European institutions have been set up to help European countries and to work for the common good. Their task must not be to impose their will within the EU. This is because such actions are not condoned by the public in individual countries and should be treated as a political mistake. A supra-state federal model of integration European will deepen the crisis situations in Europe. It may bring very harmful consequences for integration: 1) a lowering of the ability to respond effectively to the most important processes; 2) a perpetuation of the division between the center of the European Union and its periphery; 3) a deepening of the deficit of democratic trust in common authorities. Do we really want to achieve such goals in conditions of growing importance of nation states, their political identity and will to defend national interests? There is no community in Europe that meets the criteria of one nation EuropeanInstead, there are political or ethnic communities. This state of affairs implies the need to follow the principle of sovereignty of the nation-states that make up the EU, i.e. a departure from the principle of "divided sovereignty". The common European institutions are not the bearers/subjects of sovereignty, but only auxiliary bodies for the member states.

I would like to present to the honourable gentlemen and gentlemen presidents Polish project of the European Union. Its foundations were contained in the declaration A Europe of Solidary States. Security, borders, renewed institutions, that I sent you in recent weeks. The three categories contained in the title indicate both problems and prioritiesThese are the challenges that the European Community is facing today. Their importance and social impact determine the direction of the search for solutions.

I would like to point out five issues, and I present them on behalf of a parliament representing a nation that 80% supports its own country's membership in the European Union. This obliges us to be exceptionally concerned about the state of European affairs.

1. It is necessary to definition of new concepts of security, taking into account the drastic reduction in security that has taken place on a continental and sub-regional scale, which is not only the subject of theoretical considerations, but an issue that literally and dimensionally affects the daily lives of our citizens. The inhabitants of our continent expect to be provided with internal and external security (against uncontrolled immigration and terrorism), first of all the protection of public order, external borders, civilization and cultural identity, social rights. In this matter, the European Union should provide real support to the member states, as they are the ones capable of taking quick, effective and organized security measures. The idea of shifting problems from the center of the EU to the periphery is unacceptable. Other solutions that unite rather than divide the European community should be sought. Many of the problems in the area of lowering security resulted from mistakes made when taking integration decisions, for example in the area of common currency, shaping of economic order, economic management, climate protection, exercise of European rights and freedoms.

2. The solution to the migration problem cannot be ad hoc, based on pressure on EU member states. A sustainable and long-term solution to this problem must be based on 3 fundamental factors: preserving the subjectivity of Member States, respecting the identity of European peoples, and guaranteeing human rights, including the choice of place of settlement. Any coercive measures will be ineffective and will harm European integration by strengthening radical attitudes. The imposition of political will by the European Commission may be a source of new conflicts within the European community. In this matter, the slogan "more integration" is useless and counter-effective.

3. Support by European institutions of sovereign nation-states in the fulfilment of their national and pan-European security tasks. This is due to the fact that only states have the appropriate means under democratic control. In this matter, the North Atlantic Alliance should be an indispensable partner, since the immigration crisis and ongoing wars are affecting Europe as a civilization space and the identity and subjectivity of European states.

4. In renewing the European institutions, the importance of national parliaments in the decision-making process must be strengthened. Undermining them would not only have immediate as well as long-term negative consequences, in specific issues and areas, but would also undermine the fundamental issues, i.e. the model of democracy adopted in Europe and derived from Greek philosophy, Roman law and Christian values. Commitment  national parliaments of all Member States on an equal footing will achieve an invaluable result - the understanding and approval by the people of Europe of the actions taken by the European institutions. Starting from the principle that  the determination of competencies is the responsibility of nation state, the role of national parliaments in EU decision-making processes should be strengthened.

5. It is necessary to clearly define the competences of the European institutions and the European procedures. These powers should be enumerated and procedures clarified, anchored in the European treaties and not in the political will formulated on an ad hoc basis by some European countries.  The principle should be compliance with European law and not its - often arbitrary - interpretation. The phenomenon of abusive extension of the European Union treaty law leads to a harmful takeover of competences of public authorities of the Member States by the EU administration. Excessive regulation has led to an imbalance internal in the Union. For the Member States of the European Union, the most favourable situation is the one enshrined in the treaties on the division of powers between states and EU institutions. For this reason decisions in the forum of the European Council, that is to say decisions taken between Member States on the powers and activities of the European Commission and the European Parliament, are essential to stop the unfortunate trend of interfering in the internal situation of individual states. This style of action is not in line with the principle of subsidiarity.

In conclusion, we recognize the legitimacy of the renewal of the European Union, but not in the direction of building a federal state. For us, the European Union is a very important international organisation that pursues the common good and at the same time serves as a servant to the community of sovereign nation states. Transforming the Union into a federation will not solve the most important contemporary problems on the continent. It will not free entrepreneurship, it will not strengthen economic freedom, it will not bring new rights to citizens, it will not strengthen security. paradoxically endanger  integration as a project and an idea. Changes are needed in the Union, and they can only be made as a result of an open debate in individual countries and in the European institutions, but among all 28 Member States on the basis of equality and consensus. The EU does not need new institutions, including a uniform European electoral law, because their effect would be to strengthen the divisions on the continent. Instead, we are in favor of A Europe of solidarity states. For Europe is our common good.

Thank you for your attention.