Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a quotation record.
00:00:19Dear viewers, good day to you, I am Marin Laruš Kovački, you are watching
00:00:23N1 television news, here's what
00:00:24we highlight.
00:00:29Uskok announced. results of expertise in the case of illegal
00:00:32waste disposal in Gospić, which confirm serious environmental
00:00:36pollution. Experts warn that the pollution has already caused permanent
00:00:39consequences, and without urgent remediation, further spread and threat to
00:00:43human health is imminent.
00:00:46A big concession to Tehran is underway, Iran could gain control over
00:00:50maritime traffic through the Strait
00:00:52of Hormuz.
00:00:55Zlatko Dalić decided to take over as coach of the
00:00:58United Arab
00:01:00Emirates.
00:01:05Due to public interest, Uskok published the results of environmental
00:01:08protection expertise in the case of illegal waste disposal in
00:01:12Gospić, in which the married couple Šimcek is suspected. The published
00:01:15findings confirm that the area of the industrial complex in
00:01:19Bilajska street is significantly polluted. According to the expertise
00:01:22of the Geotechnical Faculty, large quantities of waste of various compositions
00:01:26were found on the site, including hazardous ecotoxic
00:01:30waste. Analyses showed extremely high concentrations
00:01:33of harmful substances such as copper, zinc, lead, and antimony.
00:01:37Experts state that soil pollution has occurred and that pollution
00:01:40has spread beyond the landfill itself. Mechanisms
00:01:44of pollutant transfer through soil, air, and vegetation have also
00:01:47been confirmed, with the possibility that the pollution has affected
00:01:51groundwater. The conclusion of the expertise is that it is a locally
00:01:54significant, very progressive contamination that has already
00:01:58caused permanent changes in the environment.
00:02:00It is warned that without remediation, the landfill will remain a permanent source
00:02:04of pollution with possible consequences for the environment and human
00:02:07health. Additional findings confirmed earlier conclusions about
00:02:11the possible impact of illegally dumped waste on groundwater.
00:02:14vode.
00:02:19It is the peak of the heatwave. Croatia
00:02:22of service. Did people expects predominantly sunny, extremely hot weather today, with temperatures
00:02:24in most parts of the country reaching between 34 and
00:02:2739°C, which is why a red warning
00:02:31is in effect for all of Croatia today. In the afternoon, with cloud development,
00:02:35local thunderstorms are possible primarily in mountainous areas and in
00:02:38the interior of Istria and
00:02:41Dalmatia.
00:02:45And Hungary is turning off ornamental lighting in all state
00:02:48institutions at night because record low water levels of the Danube are forcing
00:02:52the country to shut down its only nuclear power plant that uses
00:02:55the river for cooling, bringing electricity supply capacities to
00:02:59their limit. Hungarian companies and households
00:03:02are reducing electricity consumption this week after the government's appeal
00:03:06to reduce pressure on the
00:03:08grid.
00:03:13Iran, according to a possible agreement with Oman, could take control
00:03:17of ship traffic through the Strait of Hormuz. Israeli
00:03:21Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected the latest American
00:03:24proposal for the Gaza Strip, stating that Israel will not
00:03:28accept a plan that does not guarantee its security. Netanyahu said
00:03:31that the proposal of the Donald Trump administration is unacceptable and that
00:03:35Israel has submitted its
00:03:38the first, your pension is objections to Washington, although the plan envisages a gradual withdrawal
00:03:41of the Israeli army after the complete disarmament of Hamas.
00:03:44The Israeli Prime Minister emphasized that the survival of Israel is not a subject
00:03:48of negotiations. Meanwhile, Hamas claims to have accepted the proposal
00:03:52and called on the United States to put pressure on Israel to
00:03:56reach a ceasefire agreement. cease-fire.
00:04:06Two Israeli soldiers were killed in southern Lebanon, the Israeli army announced,
00:04:10while at least one person was killed in Israeli retaliatory attacks,
00:04:13according to the Lebanese Ministry of Health. Yesterday, the Israeli
00:04:16army launched attacks in southern Lebanon in response to what it
00:04:20called Hezbollah's violation of the truce. Israeli local
00:04:24media reported that two soldiers were killed and four wounded when
00:04:29increase also apply to an explosive device detonated in the area where they were operating in the south. The Lebanese Ministry
00:04:32of Health announced that one person was killed and twelve were wounded in the Israeli
00:04:36attack. The outbreak of settlements coincides with the latest round of negotiations
00:04:40between Israel and Lebanon in Rome. The two countries agreed in June
00:04:44on a security arrangement with the mediation of the United
00:04:47States, with the aim of mitigating hostilities along
00:04:50the border. Israel, however, said that it would maintain a security zone in
00:04:54southern Lebanon to remove the threat of the Iranian-backed
00:04:57Hezbollah group. Iran.
00:05:02Today, Japan commemorates the 81st anniversary of the American
00:05:05nuclear attack on Hiroshima, which was the first such attack in history.
00:05:09On August 6, 1945,
00:05:12when the USA dropped an atomic bomb on the Japanese city, thus accelerating the end
00:05:16of World War II. By the end of that year, about
00:05:19140,000 people died from the explosion and from injuries and illnesses caused
00:05:23by radiation. About 50,000 people from
00:05:26123 countries, including survivors,
00:05:29paid tribute with a minute of silence at the Peace Memorial Park in
00:05:33Hiroshima, after the peace bell rang at 8:15
00:05:37local time, at the time the bomb
00:05:40was dropped. The bomb weighing about 4 tons killed everyone within
00:05:43500 meters and destroyed 90% of the city. Three days
00:05:47after Hiroshima, the US dropped a bomb on Nagasaki,
00:05:51killing about 74,000
00:05:53people.
00:05:59Zlatko Dalić is returning to the Middle East. After nine years on the bench of the Croatian
00:06:02national football team, the former coach will take over
00:06:05the national team of the United Arab Emirates. According
00:06:09to 24sata, Dalić will soon travel to Dubai,
00:06:13where he is expected to sign a multi-year contract with the local football
00:06:16association. He accepted the new engagement after a vacation and talks with
00:06:20his family, having previously stated that he was more attracted to coaching than
00:06:23club work. His debut on the Emirates' bench is expected at the end
00:06:26of September at the Persian Gulf Cup. He is expected to bring
00:06:30some of his associates with whom he worked for years in the Croatian
00:06:34national team to his coaching staff. Dalić already knows football in the Emirates
00:06:37well, where he successfully managed from 2014 to
00:06:412017. Financial conditions are also one of
00:06:45the reasons for his departure. According to media reports, Dalić's
00:06:48annual salary in Dubai could amount to around 5 million
00:06:52euros.
00:06:56FIFA apologized to its members for mistakes in the withdrawn
00:07:00proposal to sell part of the commercial rights for the World Cup. After
00:07:03a crisis meeting in Morocco, the leadership of the organization once again expressed
00:07:07full support for President Gianni Infantino. In a statement after
00:07:11the meeting, FIFA admitted that the proposal should have been presented and managed
00:07:14differently and announced a revision of the entire
00:07:17process. A letter of apology was sent to the members of the FIFA Council and all
00:07:21national football associations. The controversial plan
00:07:24envisioned selling a 20% stake in a new body that would
00:07:28manage the commercial rights for the World Cup, which was intended
00:07:31to raise about 4.2 billion
00:07:34dollars for football development. The proposal was withdrawn last week after
00:07:37sharp criticism from UEFA and numerous FIFA members who
00:07:41accused it of lack of transparency and poor
00:07:44management. Despite the criticism, the leadership of the umbrella football
00:07:47organization said that it still has full confidence in Infantino
00:07:50and announced that it will take all necessary measures to protect
00:07:54the reputation of the organization.
00:07:58But despite all this, more and more national organizations are turning away
00:08:01from Infantino. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney stated that he has no confidence
00:08:05in
00:08:05him.
00:08:12your chief operating officer, uh, your fellow
00:08:15board members, uh, something of consequence that you're even considering, let
00:08:19alone proposing, uh,
00:08:21that
00:08:24that's fatal, uh, should be fatal, uh, and you
00:08:27lose confidence, uh, in that individual, they have their
00:08:30own procedures for making those determinations, but certainly I don't
00:08:34have confidence in, uh, Mr. Infantino, after this
00:08:38point, I, uh, given given what transpired, and given the
00:08:41nature of what..."
00:08:45That's all for the news, stay tuned to N1 program, our portal N1
00:08:49info HR and social networks. The next news overview is at 2 PM.
00:09:30On this topic, in the meantime, Damir Bakić from the "Možemo" party joined
00:09:33me in the studio. He is a member of parliament and a representative
00:09:36in the city assembly, otherwise a person who deals with
00:09:40the issue of pensions, the pension system.
00:09:50commenting on this announcement by Prime Minister Andrej Plenković about
00:09:53this increase. How do you see it? Maybe
00:09:57especially, let me immediately add the context, your party had a proposal in
00:10:00June, something similar, so let's see if there are any
00:10:04discrepancies here regarding what kind of proposal this is. That's right, so there is that
00:10:08context, but let's go maybe from the end. So we, as
00:10:12basically the entire public, first heard about this yesterday at the celebration in
00:10:15Knin from Prime Minister Plenković. And
00:10:19so maybe for starters, let's just say we actually still
00:10:23don't know all the details of that proposal, so it's a bit
00:10:26ungrateful to talk about it more precisely, more exactly, what
00:10:30will happen now, what is actually being offered, what will be
00:10:34written in those legal proposals,
00:10:37however, I would say that
00:10:41the proposals for amendments to these two laws will reach parliamentary
00:10:44procedure, the government's proposals for amendments, I would say
00:10:48that this is not a surprise for us, we actually expected
00:10:51something like that. So far, experience, also in a
00:10:55broader context in Parliament, especially with these
00:10:58laws, has in many ways
00:11:01indicated that something like that would happen.
00:11:04Briefly, a few words about the
00:11:08context, so, we really prepared two legal
00:11:11proposals which regulate or
00:11:15try to improve and
00:11:18advance, increase the pensions of those veterans who
00:11:22continued to work after the war and who were then retired
00:11:25according to or will be retired according to the law on pension
00:11:28insurance,
00:11:30uh, there was a clear intention, there was a clear, clear
00:11:33explanation, maybe now for
00:11:37this context it is important to mention the very first
00:11:40thing that clearly indicated what could
00:11:44happen, nobody, absolutely nobody, despite
00:11:47the discussion as it was, stormy, controversial at
00:11:50times and very, very,
00:11:53to put it mildly. "Mhm, nobody disputed
00:11:57the assessment of the situation, nobody disputed the need for
00:12:00intervention in that area. These proposals of ours, however, were
00:12:04flatly rejected, as you saw, and
00:12:08already perhaps the first concrete indication that this
00:12:11is coming soon is something that may not be sufficiently
00:12:15known to the public at all, because we
00:12:18, after the parliamentary debate on our two
00:12:22laws, on the proposals for their
00:12:25amendments, very quickly, very quickly,
00:12:28at the beginning of July, we simply sat down and wrote two
00:12:32new legal proposals, where we primarily
00:12:36considered everything that, although little was said on the merits,
00:12:40but we considered everything that we believed was reasonable
00:12:43and necessary to improve these laws.
00:12:47We added a few more things that we thought
00:12:51were necessary. So, two completely new legal proposals,
00:12:55with the same, let's say, the same concept, following the same
00:12:58idea. Then something very unusual happened and
00:13:02I, I would dare to say unfair. Namely, according to
00:13:06the rules, if these legal proposals are
00:13:08technically in order, the Speaker of the Parliament must include them in
00:13:12the agenda within 30 days.
00:13:15The Speaker of the Parliament includes all legal proposals
00:13:19that regularly arrive on the agenda
00:13:22in a much shorter period of just a few
00:13:25days. There is no reason to wait. However, he did not
00:13:28include our proposals in the agenda. To our
00:13:31inquiry as to why he did not include them,
00:13:33he actually resorted to a parliamentary
00:13:37procedural trick,
00:13:39saying that he has the right to wait
00:13:4330 days, with those 30 days ceasing
00:13:46to count on July 15, when
00:13:49the work of the Parliament ends, when the work of the Parliament ends. In other words, our
00:13:53legal proposals were put on hold, so that
00:13:56the government could in the meantime come in with its own. So that's
00:14:00roughly that kind of political
00:14:03context.
00:14:06In terms of content,
00:14:08as I said, we need to see what exactly it says.
00:14:12Uh, maybe it's most important that,
00:14:16maybe there are a few questions that I would, that
00:14:20should be addressed at the beginning. First of all, to whom do these
00:14:24government's proposals for legal amendments apply? The Prime Minister
00:14:27mentions how many 200,000 were mentioned yesterday? So,
00:14:31it is not clear to whom all this will apply.
00:14:34A few things are then particularly important, for
00:14:38example, if these pensions
00:14:41are increased, uh, a fundamental
00:14:45question is whether they will be increased only in advance, i.e., only
00:14:49for those who will only be retired, or will this
00:14:54those who have already retired? That is
00:14:56the first. Secondly, there is the question of
00:15:00disability pensions, which is not adequately resolved in
00:15:04the current regulations,
00:15:06because actually we need to distinguish, we need
00:15:09to distinguish two types of disability pensions: one is those that arose,
00:15:13where, of course, the inability to work, i.e.,
00:15:16disability, arose as a direct consequence
00:15:19of participation in war operations, and the other are those
00:15:22disability pensions that arose, so to speak, from work,
00:15:26when the veteran returned to his
00:15:30job, worked, I don't know, maybe for many years like all
00:15:33citizens, maybe got into some kind of
00:15:36health condition that required it, or,
00:15:40but which is not a direct consequence of participation
00:15:42in the war. Okay, and the third thing that is very important to
00:15:46somehow understand,
00:15:48we haven't seen yet how it's written and how it's envisioned, that's the question of family
00:15:52pensions, and again there are somehow two
00:15:56categories, because one are family
00:15:59pensions that arose, whose
00:16:02right to which arose immediately after the war
00:16:06due to veterans killed in war operations, and the other are
00:16:10, of course, what happens in the general population, so family
00:16:14pensions after the eventual death of the
00:16:18insured person, i.e., the pensioner. Now, these are
00:16:22all a series of questions that these
00:16:24laws need to regulate, and now it's hard to comment on anything more specifically.
00:16:28Clearly, the part that interests me, since it
00:16:32was part of your proposals, that moment was
00:16:35interesting to me. You say: the current system has actually
00:16:39punished those veterans who did not retire early
00:16:43with a privileged pension, but rather continued to work
00:16:46after the war. How do you believe their status should be
00:16:50regulated and are there
00:16:52any other actors in Croatia who have pointed out and
00:16:56noticed such a discrepancy in this specific
00:17:00population? Okay, so,
00:17:03uh, like this, so
00:17:07when we look at that category of veterans, those veterans who
00:17:10retired under general regulations, meaning those who returned
00:17:14to their jobs after the war,
00:17:16the problem with that is,
00:17:20the problem is that, uh,
00:17:23to put it very simply, the problem is
00:17:26that the Law on Croatian Veterans offers them certain benefits
00:17:29in terms of pension calculation, mhm,
00:17:33but they are not entitled to a pension supplement that the general
00:17:36population has, mhm." "And more or less, that somehow then
00:17:39evens out, and it is undoubtedly
00:17:43shown by the numbers. The average pension
00:17:46of the general population and the average pension
00:17:50of that category of veterans who continued to work is more or less
00:17:53the same, for more or less the same average length of service, which is somewhere around
00:17:5631 years
00:17:59point this out before? Well, sporadically, I think so,
00:18:03but nobody organized it and nobody made an effort to do anything
00:18:06about it." "We were in contact with, I mean,
00:18:10all of us in our circles, many of us even in our
00:18:14families, we have people who, who
00:18:17continued to work after participating in
00:18:21the Homeland War. I mean, they didn't
00:18:25ask for anything or demand anything, but we all knew very well what the
00:18:28situation was, and people were more bothered by that feeling
00:18:32of injustice, because somehow in the public space, it is
00:18:35mostly the belief that veteran
00:18:38pensions are high or even very
00:18:42high for our circumstances. This is perhaps
00:18:45true for one category of veterans, for those who
00:18:48retired immediately after the war, but by no means for those who continued
00:18:52to work. The fact that this announcement
00:18:56comes during yesterday's celebration of Operation Storm,
00:18:59in the context of this, let's say, ignoring, as
00:19:02you say, your proposals by Parliament, do
00:19:05you think that there will really be
00:19:08some change in the government's policy or is it still
00:19:11perhaps more of a populist
00:19:15approach to this topic? Well, I would dare to say that this
00:19:19is largely a forced move. As I said,
00:19:22our argumentation, I mean, we can discuss, as you
00:19:26asked earlier, we can discuss the
00:19:28modality of how to improve the material status of that
00:19:32group of veterans, how to intervene in the law
00:19:35to increase those pensions. That can be discussed. It seems that the government
00:19:39has a different idea than we had with our laws, but that
00:19:43is completely legitimate. The Prime Minister announced something like a pension
00:19:47supplement, so something that will be, how can I say,
00:19:50an integral part of the pension, rather than just some
00:19:53kind of supplement. Okay, the modalities, the modalities can
00:19:57be discussed, but I would say that this is a forced move. It was
00:20:01perfectly clear, perfectly clear from
00:20:04all, how can I say, all indicators. From our
00:20:08contacts, we went through maybe 10 or 15 major
00:20:11Croatian cities in our campaign, and everywhere the response was
00:20:15the same, everywhere we received
00:20:17extremely, uh, how can I say, extremely strong,
00:20:21open, undivided support for
00:20:24opening this issue,
00:20:27uh, the argumentation, as
00:20:30I said, was never refuted, and it seems
00:20:33to me that the government had no other choice but to,
00:20:37and unfortunately that's how it is in our, let's say,
00:20:41political milieu,
00:20:43not to
00:20:47constructively agree to discuss a proposal that came
00:20:50from the opposition, as it never did, of course,
00:20:53but to crush that proposal,
00:20:57then quickly repackage it and present
00:21:01it as its own. If that government
00:21:04proposal, which Prime Minister Plenković
00:21:06announced, is put to a vote, if
00:21:10its modality and the whole story surrounding that
00:21:14proposal are, in your view, correct,
00:21:18will you support it? Well, I mean, there's no doubt that we
00:21:22will support every proposal that goes in
00:21:25that direction. Ultimately, we
00:21:28simply believed that it was necessary to do so. Another
00:21:31thing is how it will be done. We will, there is absolutely no
00:21:35dilemma, be extremely engaged in that
00:21:38discussion. When we see the legal text, there will probably
00:21:42be an opportunity to discuss it much more specifically.
00:21:45If necessary, we will submit
00:21:48amendments, if we submit amendments, if
00:21:51we need to do some more additional analyses, to propose
00:21:55possibly some corrections, but
00:21:59so we don't have that problem, we don't have that
00:22:02problem of
00:22:06taking a negative stance towards a proposal
00:22:09just because it came from the government.
00:22:12So, that was the case with the Reconstruction Law, that was the case with a whole series
00:22:16of laws, that was, of course, the case with all
00:22:20previous examples where the government de facto copied a legal proposal
00:22:24from the opposition. So, parliament is not a place where one
00:22:27should be spiteful or,
00:22:30I don't know, act in defense
00:22:33of one's stubbornness or politicize in such
00:22:37a way. If, then, that proposal goes in the direction in which we
00:22:40believe it should go, the announcement seems, based on the announcement,
00:22:44that it will be so, our support will come. Before
00:22:48we move on to the entire pension system,
00:22:52I must ask you,
00:22:54how do you
00:22:56see if it is politically
00:23:00fair to increase veteran pensions
00:23:04separately as a special category, while there is
00:23:07a portion of citizens with full working years who
00:23:11receive pensions of several hundred
00:23:12euros?
00:23:15That is a very, very difficult question. That
00:23:18is, of course, a very difficult
00:23:20question. - Believe me, we have
00:23:24specifically thought about this question a lot when we were preparing these legal proposals
00:23:27and when we were passing them. The answer is, both are necessary,
00:23:31uh, I will remind you of the following:
00:23:34in our pension system, so when we look at all our
00:23:38pensioners, you have
00:23:40approximately
00:23:44approximately 940,000
00:23:47pensioners... uh, whose pensions
00:23:50are, first of all, who were retired according to the pension
00:23:53insurance law, and whose pensions are determined according to the pension
00:23:57insurance law. This is the basic group that we most often have
00:24:01in mind when we talk about the state, about the difficult
00:24:04state of our pensioners and about the state of our system.
00:24:08Besides them, however, you have another, I don't know, 250
00:24:12thousand or something similar,
00:24:14uh,
00:24:17pensioners who were retired
00:24:21in 19 groups who were retired under special
00:24:25regulations or whose pensions are determined under
00:24:28special regulations. Two of these groups are
00:24:31veterans, but there you have a whole spectrum
00:24:35of various special groups, such as, I don't know, former
00:24:38political officials, members of parliament, while
00:24:42that infamous law on members of parliament's
00:24:45pensions was in force, and so on and so
00:24:49forth. Our position from the beginning was the following:
00:24:52actually, it is especially necessary to resolve the status,
00:24:56let's say, of this basic, fundamental group of
00:24:58pensioners, uh, because, because it
00:25:01is, it is the image of the system.
00:25:04It is especially necessary to resolve the status of each of these groups, and that
00:25:08solution must not, should not, in any way, be
00:25:12uniform for everyone, because each of these 19 special groups has its own
00:25:16specificities, its own reasons why their pensions are
00:25:20calculated separately. The real concern is how to increase
00:25:23the pensions of the general population. We believed
00:25:27and discussed this already several
00:25:31years ago in our election programs, in all public statements, that
00:25:34generally it is necessary to raise
00:25:37the general level of these pensions, it is necessary to raise the general level of these
00:25:41pensions beyond those
00:25:44regular semi-annual adjustments. Now,
00:25:47to raise the general level of these pensions, that's...
00:25:52This is the question of all questions
00:25:55how, uh, maybe here's just this one piece of information, so we don't
00:25:59overburden the conversation with numbers, but...
00:26:05"In total, it
00:26:07is necessary to pay all pensions in Croatia this year
00:26:11and the pension insurance
00:26:13institute needs over 10 billion euros, over
00:26:1710 billion euros, that's more than a quarter of our
00:26:21budget,
00:26:24out of those 10 billion euros, six billion are collected from
00:26:28contributions, and four must
00:26:31be directly..." "let's say helped with budget
00:26:34money,
00:26:36to raise the pension level by only one percentage point, by only
00:26:40one percentage point, which actually every individual pensioner will not
00:26:43even feel, feel, meaning 100 million euros annually
00:26:47that is obviously a very non-trivial question,
00:26:50now there are of course various modalities,
00:26:54some things the government has already announced,
00:26:57and we have some objections
00:27:01and maybe..." "some proposals that would improve
00:27:05or enhance or
00:27:08expand those measures, one is of course the announcement
00:27:10of the abolition of tax on pensions, the second
00:27:14is what has now again somewhat fallen into the shadows, but I think it is
00:27:18very, very unfairly resolved, that is the question of the right
00:27:21to work after retirement, I don't know we can return to both, we can
00:27:24and generally, of course, there is
00:27:27also the question of adjustment, we recently changed the adjustment formula
00:27:31again." And that is, of course, a question of budget
00:27:35possibilities for an extraordinary increase in the
00:27:38level of general pensions, I say these basic groups
00:27:41of pensioners, these are some key
00:27:44questions and uh,
00:27:48by no means, how can I say, by no means would it
00:27:51be good to solve only the question
00:27:54of pensions of one particular group and not have in
00:27:58mind the system as a whole, especially its...
00:28:02fundamental, most important part,
00:28:05please, did you have something to say, taxes
00:28:08and and and work from
00:28:10retirement,
00:28:13let's go first with work from retirement, so that
00:28:16is some novelty, we
00:28:19until about a year, a year ago, more or less,
00:28:22had a legal solution according to which
00:28:25pensioners,
00:28:27old-age pensioners
00:28:29were allowed to work up to
00:28:3350% of their working hours
00:28:36without their pension payments being
00:28:38interrupted.
00:28:40Now demographic trends are what they are, the situation in the
00:28:44labor market is what it is, pensions are
00:28:47what they are, there was obviously a need to allow pensioners
00:28:51or to consider regulating
00:28:55the question of their full-time work and
00:28:58the legislator allowed it in the Parliament,
00:29:01such a law was passed. Pensioners who are in
00:29:05old-age pension can now work full-time
00:29:08further, continue
00:29:11to work or re-employ themselves, of course if they want to,
00:29:15but but in such a way that they only have the right to
00:29:19half of their pension, and they have the salary they earn, whatever full salary
00:29:22they earn, the salary earned plus half of the pension, but only
00:29:26half of the pension, mind you, you worked until you were 65
00:29:29years old, it doesn't matter whether your pension came from the first
00:29:33or from the second pension pillar, especially if it came from the second pension
00:29:37pillar, and even if it came from
00:29:40entirely earned, maybe some
00:29:44parameters in the law changed,
00:29:47maybe the contribution rates changed,
00:29:50the formulas for calculation changed, but the basic
00:29:53agreement remained always the same, until the age of 65
00:29:57you work, you pay contributions for the pensions of current
00:30:01pensioners after the age of 65 your
00:30:04pension belongs to you, which is completely
00:30:07earned and there is absolutely no logic
00:30:11and no argument that
00:30:13if you continue or if you want to or if you can
00:30:17work, it doesn't matter if you work because you
00:30:20enjoy it or if sheer necessity forces you to, that someone should
00:30:23now take half of your pension for the time you work, that
00:30:27is absolutely unfair, we
00:30:29and not only us, not only our party in the Parliament, we
00:30:33argued this, there was no understanding, but there were no
00:30:37counter-arguments either, so this is something that needs to be vigorously
00:30:40changed, that is the first thing, the second thing, tax on
00:30:44pensions, we have been advocating this for at least three or four
00:30:47years, very much, very vigorously, and now it is finally being
00:30:51announced, but now it seems to me we have gone from
00:30:54one extreme to another, because the announcement is that
00:30:58taxes on pensions will be completely abolished.