ZPP appeals for Russian and Belarussian products to be withdrawn from sale

 

Renata Juszkiewicz
President of the Management Board 
Polish Organization of Commerce and Distribution (POHID)

 

Dear Renata,

Please distribute this Appeal among the members of POHID.

 

APPEAL

Dear Sir/Madam,

I heartily appeal upon you to withdraw Russian and Belarussian products from sale.

Both these countries – alas, supported by substantial citizens populations – murder people. They are ruled by war criminals.

Not a single zloty spent by the Polish consumer should go to such criminal regimes.

Please consider my appeal. I strongly believe in your business and wish you every success.

 

Cezary Kaźmierczak
President of the ZPP

Warsaw, 15 February 2022 

 

Marcin Nowacki, vice president of the ZPP, holder of the Economic Freedom Award of the Heritage Foundation

 

Heritage Foundation, one of the most influential conservative think tanks in the world, has announced Marcin Nowacki, vice president of the ZPP, as the recipient of its annual Economic Freedom Award. The Foundation thus recognised his lifelong work advancing the principles of free market, economic freedom and fair competition in Poland and the European Union.

The Heritage Foundation, established in Washington in 1973, is involved in promoting conservative political thought, economic freedom and educating leaders. For 25 years now the Foundation has been publishing a high profile annual Index of Economic Freedom which presents the status of bureaucracy in the economies of individual countries.

Find out more

Warsaw, 24 February 2022

 

Appeal of the Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers to impose hard and deep sanctions on Russia 

 

The Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers (ZPP) condemn the unauthorized and outrageous act of Russian aggression against Ukraine. Military interference in the territorial integrity of another state and the pursuit of a policy of conquest are behaviors that go beyond the framework of the modern international order and deserve strong condemnation. The Russian state has excluded itself from the international community, and the Putin regime’s actions require a strong and bold response from the Western world.

Bearing in mind the above, we call for all necessary steps to be taken to ensure that Russia’s aggression is met with a proper and adequate response, and above all – with the most severe and deep economic sanctions.

ZPP believes that all options that are on the table and at the disposal of international institutions should be used – including the exclusion of Russia from the international financial system and the maximum possible restriction on trade, as well as the extensive use of personal sanctions, such as freezing assets or entry bans. Investments made in cooperation with the Russian energy industry, including Nord Stream 2 in particular, should also be absolutely halted.

We cannot be afraid of applying the most severe sanctions at our disposal. The Russian economy is one-third smaller than that of Italy itself – a country more than twice less populous. The GDP of the European Union is fifteen times the GDP of Russia. Russia’s GDP per capita, taking into account the purchasing power parity, is lower than that of Poland, Romania or the Czech Republic. Russia is economically much weaker and poorer than we are. European companies and consumers will therefore do without Russian money.

We count on decisive and bold actions from Poland and international institutions. Putin’s banditry must be stopped by all means possible. At the same time, we express our deep solidarity with the Ukrainian people.

 

See more: Appeal of the Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers to impose hard and deep sanctions on Russia

February 18 2022

 

ZPP’s contribution to consultations on Artificial Intelligence Act launched by MEP Axel Voss

 

The Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers welcomes the consultations on the Artificial Intelligence Act (AIA) organized by MEP Axel Voss. Below we present the most pertinent issues which, in our opinion, are key to unlocking the potential of the European digital economy in the years to come.

1. What is the best definition of AI?

In our view, the definition currently proposed under the AIA is too broad. If enacted, AIA would cover a range of solutions that from the perspective of industrial and commercial practice do not constitute Artificial Intelligence (AI). For instance, the Annex I point (a) lists machine learning methods, while Annex I point (c) includes statistical approaches, Bayesian estimation, as well as search and optimization methods. If enacted in this wording, AIA would classify virtually any algorithm, optimization method or statistical calculation as AI. Therefore, in the view of ZPP, it is of paramount importance to omit Annex I point (c) from the final version of the regulation.

2. What encompasses high-risk?

ZPP has participated in the consultation process of AIA since the begging and has consequently advocated for the adoption of risk-based approach. We welcome the Commission’s proposal to the imposition of mandatory requirements. In our view by adopting a proportional, risk-based approach the Commission found a good balance between maintaining scope for innovation and protecting citizens.

At the same time, we believe that the provisions of AIA need more clarification. Areas that need more fine-tuning include the differentiation of responsibilities between AI actors in the value chain and specific requirements for high-risk uses of AI.

3. How to combine it with ethical standards?

In our opinion, the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU, as well as aquis communaitaire, constitute primary sources of ethical standards in the EU and are as such recognized as binding. Therefore, any limitation to the use of AI should be based on a potential infringement of rules, which form community law already today. Widening this group of sources would create risks to the coherence of the EU legal framework, and risk decreasing legal certainty.

4. How can we make sure the AI governance approach works?

We have formulated a number of specific recommendations with a view to implementation and enforcement of AIA.

First, AIA should clarify the balance of responsibilities between AI providers, deployers and users. Particular attention should be paid to the question of responsibilities of AI users as deployers, and the responsibilities of providers to their customers. Currently, AIA does not provide a definition of a deployer. In our view, inclusion of a definition as an entity making the AI available to users in a specific situation would increase coherence and clarity of the overall regulatory framework.

Second, the success of AIA depends on whether the requirements are reasonable and feasible. In order to achieve that, language around certain provisions needs to be revised in order not to set an impossible standard. For instance, the requirements imposed for high-risk AI are in principle proportionate. Nevertheless, the language of the provisions should be revised to make sure that the provisions can be applied in practice. An example of an obligation, which is impossible to implement in practice, is Art. 10(3) stating that “Training, validation and testing data sets shall be relevant, representative, free of errors and complete.” While the goal is right, it is impossible to guarantee this in practice. Moreover, certain techniques aiming at improving users’ privacy deliberately introduce error (noise) to datasets.

In a similar vein, AIA should avoid introducing disproportionate requirements. One such example include Art. 64(a), which states that “…upon a reasoned request, the market surveillance authorities shall be granted access to the source code of the AI system.” On the one hand, this provision is contrary the EU Trade Secrets Directive. On the other hand, there are less intrusive yet effective means to verify performance of an AI system. Therefore, in our opinion it would be beneficial to change this provision in order to obligate AI providers and deployers to effectively support market surveillance authorities to carry our robust testing (input/output audition).

 

See more: ZPP’s contribution to consultations on Artificial Intelligence Act

Brussels, 9 February 2022 

 

“The Future of Europe doesn’t only mean the EU“, said MEP Ivan Stefanec during his opening of a debate on The Associated Trio: Enhancing Cooperation for Peace, Democracy and Prosperity that he hosted.

On the 9th of February, the Union of Entrepreneurs and Employers, together with the European Enterprise Alliance, the SME Connect and SME Europe, co-organised a debate bringing together the perspectives from Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to discuss how Brussels could build practically on the success of the Association Agreements signed in 2016 and 2017. 

While this step undoubtedly encouraged the Trio nations to draw closer to the bloc, the European Union cannot rest on this accomplishment alone. Rather, speakers emphasised that both sides have to take concrete steps to advance this relationship and ultimately conclude the accession of the trio countries to the European Union. They focused on formally recognising the Associated Trio as a distinct grouping within the Eastern Partnership (EaP) and reconsidering proposals to pursue integration on a sector by sector basis with enhanced economic integration. In their views, it would demonstrate the commitment of the European Union and lead to a watershed moment to push for a more visionary policy on the European continent.

In December 2019, Georgia, Ukraine and Moldova – the three EaP countries with an Association Agreement with the EU – signed a joint statement submitted to EU High Representative. In the statement, they advocated a new EU+3 format enabling sectoral integration in transport, energy and other fields, as well as full access to the four freedoms of the EU – free movement of goods, services, capital and persons to help them progress faster on their path to European integration. 

During his intervention, Deputy Economic Minister of Ukraine, Mr Taras Kachka, outlined that his country ambitions are focused on daily economic integration. More business to business dialogue is needed to overcome the prejudice about the competitive advantage and picture Ukraine as a strategic partner and not a competitor.

Mr Vladimir Cuc, a State Secretary of Foreign Affairs Ministry of Moldova, followed this statement and added that he welcomed the Associated Trio’s shared ambitions while advocating for its expansion through informal ministerial meetings. 

Ms Mariam Gabunia, Head of Foreign Trade Policy from Georgia, highlighted that “despite challenges, we continue to implement complex reforms to transform our legal and institutional system”. She said that Georgia has achieved 40% of its commitments and strive to reach 65% before applying for the European Union membership in 2024. 

Member of the European Parliament, Luliu Winkler, said that “we need to go beyond economic cooperation and have a social impact, changing people and communities’ lives for the better” through dialogue and diplomacy. 

Whereas, a Member of the European Parliament and a Vice-Chair of the European Parliament’s Defense Committee, Lukas Mandl, stressed that we should focus on the areas of cooperation when we can deepen our engagement: Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) projects, and peace and capability building. 

Damir Filipovic, Secretary-General of the European Enterprise Alliance, reminded that the EU has a good recipe for relations with Georgia, Moldova and Ukraine. But it also needs to adapt for the future and focus on a deeper inclusion of political, societal and security dimensions. Moreover, it has to look in more pragmatic ways and consider the sectoral approach or present a more flexible approach depending on the particular needs of the partner. 

Agata Boutanos outlined that from business perspective it is crucial to strengthen the already developed association by further support for EU standards implementation.

See more: Online Debate – The Associated Trio: Enhancing Cooperation for Peace, Democracy and Prosperity