Read the original text at eurointegration.com.ua.
MPs and officials have declared their wealth. The savings and the way the officials tried to explain the sources of their millions, have become a subject of interested among the Western media.
Why? The answer is simple, because at the background of wealthy Ukrainian members of parliament (12.3 billion UAH it total), their Western counterparts look poor as church mice.
This is well illustrated by the example of Poland - a country where GDP per capita is six times higher than in Ukraine. According to declarations for 2015, total wealth of 460 Polish deputies make up 3.2 billion UAH (530 million zloty). This is four times less than the total wealth of Ukrainian deputies.
Or another case in point - a fortune of ten richest Ukrainian MPs is five times larger than the fortune of ten richest members of the Polish Sejm.
This Polish MPs officially earn more than their Ukrainian counterparts.
The average salary Polish deputy is 65 thousand UAH (9 892,2 PLN) per month, i.e. four times more than in the Ukrainian parliament.
Additionally Poles can count on 13 thousand UAH (2 500 PLN) additional payments to parliamentary activity and 81.5 thousand UAH per reception (12 150 PLN) per month.
But despite such salaries, they still remain "poorer" than their Ukrainian counterparts.
A similar situation can be seen by comparing and two governments.
Prime Minister Vladimir Groisman, with his wife, declared UAH 6.3 million UAH, 1.24 million US $ and 476 thousand euros of funds in the total amount of 52.4 million UAH.
Prime Minister of Poland Beata Szydlo declared at the end of 2015 savings in the amount of 86.6 thousand zł in the accounts and 80.66 euros in cash together does not exceed 550 thousand UAH.
Polish Prime amassed a hundred times smaller than a money Prime Minister of Ukraine (not including him in the said declaration of land and several luxury watches).
The richest member of the Polish government is Mateus Moravetskyy - Minister of Development and Finance. Prior to 2015 he was minister from 1998 he worked in the banking industry, including chairman of the board was one of the biggest Polish banks. His declared 20.4 million UAH (3.158 million PLN), securities worth 24.9 million UAH (3.839 million PLN) and two houses.
However, his fortunes are different from savings of Ukrainian "former business." After all these fortunes are clear for officials and members who have just joined the management team before actually doing business in recent years.
Instead, such condition is not acceptable, especially for MPs and ministers who were 10 years working in state and local structures.
It is no coincidence Polish media have focused on this Ukrainian paradox - "successful business" in the 1990s and wife-millionaire still allow carelessly have political activity.
This pattern is even more impressive if analyze income of the executive and legislative branches, which have several years of experience. In Poland, where official salary is much higher than in Ukraine, after 5-10 years of almost no one has the possibility to buy an apartment for cash without the involvement of credit.
Does Poland have some "exceptions"?
In 2013, Polish Minister Slawomir Nowak resigned Minister of Transport after the publication of media information that he did not declare his watch, the value of which was estimated 70 to 90 thousand UAH. By the way, he now works in Ukraine.
In Ukraine, people's deputies and officials, and often their wives or husbands, own several apartments, artworks or high-end machines, and no one is surprised. To build transparent operating state, Ukrainian authorities must break the close ties between business and access to power.
Therefore, the first task facing numerous anti-corruption bodies is to check the sources of the declared funds. And with this reason, check the richest and most notorious characters headlines.
The second, more important problem facing society is rethinking of the ideal public servant and politician, not a businessman or a millionaire, and prefer more ethical young people.
The administration should engage people for whom the benefit of the state and society is more important than the clock from Santa Claus.