Prime Minister Donald Tusk and his ruling Civic Platform (PO) party have been taking a hammering in the polls recently.

A February TNS OBOP survey indicates that 70 percent of Poles now disapprove of the way the government is running the country while only 23 percent think it is doing a good job.

Meanwhile, Mr Tusk himself has a job-approval rating of just 28 percent, the lowest since he arrived in office.

The government has been strongly criticized in the media for the confusion surrounding a prescription-drug reform implemented in January this year, for initially supporting the highly-unpopular ACTA treaty and for controversy regarding the newly-built zł.2 billion National Stadium, which is said to fall short of the required standard in several respects.

The PM's proposal to increase the retirement age to 67 for both men and women has understandably not won him many friends either.

Mediocre competition

In a competitive political environment, the ruling party's slip-ups would have caused it to lose a considerable amount of ground to its rivals. But Poland's political scene is far from competitive.

Even though many have started to lose faith in PO, they are by no means turning to the biggest opposition party, Law and Justice (PiS), which is simply too conservative, too nationalistic and too aesthetically unpalatable for the majority of Poles.

According to recent voter surveys, a few Poles seem to be turning to the other parliamentary opposition parties, namely the leftist Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) and Palikot's Movement (RP).

But those parties are likewise incapable of wooing over anything close to a majority of voters.

SLD, which ruled Poland between 2001-2005 is mainly remembered for the corruption scandals which plagued the country during its time in office. The party has not managed to recover since then and is still not considered trustworthy and credible by most Poles.

RP, meanwhile, is led by the often irritating, narcissistic Janusz Palikot, who, while supported by some 12-15 percent of Poles, has the largest negative electorate (45 percent) after PiS leader Jarosław Kaczyński.

Mr Palikot is a nihilist, ready to say or do anything just to be at the center of attention, and most Poles simply don't take him very seriously.

RP's mix of very socially and economically liberal views are also unlikely to attract a huge number of Poles.

A monopoly

All this means that despite all the disappointment and frustration many Poles feel with PO, they simply don't see any alternative to the current ruling party and its leader Donald Tusk.

What's worse, PO politicians are perfectly aware of this and thus the criticism they are currently receiving is unlikely to make them step up their game as it would if they had serious political rivals. Only the PM himself is capable of jolting his ministers into better performances.

Journalists and political observers can criticize, lament and lambaste all they want but the truth of the matter is that in the end, PO can still turn around and say “Ok, we're useless, but so what?” And honestly speaking, it's difficult to respond to that.

 

 

The latest polls clearly show that the ruling Civic Platform (PO) party has been seriously damaged by the mistakes it has made since the beginning of 2012.

A February SMG KRC poll has PO with 27 percent support, down 6 percentage points from January. The opposition Law and Justice (PiS) polled at 23 percent (+1).

Third was Palikot's Movement (RP) with 17 percent (+3) followed by the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) with 10 percent support (+2) and the junior coalition partner the Polish Peoples' Party (PSL) with 6 percent support (-3).

A TNS OBOP poll, also carried out in February, was even more negative for PO, putting support for that party at 28 percent (9 percentage points less than in January), with PiS snapping at their heels with 26 (+4) percent.

Three times unlucky

PO has suffered three PR catastrophes this year. The first was the poorly-executed and controversial prescription-drugs reform which came into force on January 1 this year, arousing anger, frustration and confusion among doctors, pharmacists and patients alike. The fiasco was well-publicized and was a terrible start to the year for the ruling party.

Then came the ACTA treaty palaver, as internet users from across the country protested against what they perceive to be a bill that will introduce too many restrictions on the internet. Here, the loudest protests came from a group which has for years been a key electorate for PO – the urban youth.

The latest problem for the government is the chaos surrounding the opening of the newly-built National Stadium in Warsaw. A fixture that was supposed to officially inaugurate the stadium has been postponed several times. There are complaints that not everything is up to standard in the stadium, which cost zł.2 billion to build.

Knowledge gap

Sports Minister Joanna Mucha has been derided in the press recently for exhibiting a rather limited knowledge of the field she is supposed to be overseeing. She recently asked publicly who had “decided on” the two soccer teams that were due to play in Poland's Supercup.

Journalists had to point out to the minister that it is the Ekstraklasa league winner and the Polish cup winner that play for the Supercup, rather than teams that had been “decided” by someone.

All these events have served to seriously dent the image PO has so carefully cultivated in recent years – namely that it is a party of highly-competent, knowledgeable professionals.

Prime Minister Donald Tusk, who openly admits to valuing pragmatism over ideology, has had one simple message for Poles in recent years: That while PO politicians may not be the stuff of voters' dreams, and may not be statesmen or outstanding individuals, they are pragmatic and much more competent and professional than any of their political opponents.

Up until now, a large number of Poles have bought into PO's narrative, but in recent weeks its “professional” image has received a series of heavy blows.

The real cause of PO's problems

But there is a more important explanation as to why PO is getting so much bad press these days. It's because the “PiS vaccine” is starting to wear off.

It is no secret that the majority of the opinion-forming media in Poland are dead set against the idea of the biggest opposition party, the conservative and nationalistic PiS, coming back to power.

The mere thought of Jarosław Kaczyński's party achieving this is anathema to much of Poland's cultural and business elite.

And so while there was a parliamentary election on the horizon and even a slight possibility that PiS might regain power, criticism of PO was muted in many Polish media outlets.

The notion that “criticizing PO only strengthens PiS” was verbalized by some well-known publicists as a valid reason to refrain from criticizing the ruling party and focus instead on hammering away at PiS.

This process is what one PO-friendly publicist has described as “injecting the public with the PiS vaccine.”

But right now, there are no elections for at least three years and the prospect of a PiS return to power now seems so distant and abstract that it can no longer serve as a means of rallying the troops for the ruling party.

Gloves are off

That's also why the gloves are off, at least for now, regarding the media's attitude towards PO.

Frustrations about the ruling party, once discussed only within journalistic circles, are now being formulated in newspapers, on TV and on the radio. The effects of this are evident in the recent polls.

Prime Minister Tusk can react in one of two ways.

He can decide that his government and party need to be jolted into action, and bring out the whip.

Or he can say to himself “what the hell? ... let the establishment media make all the noise they want … they still don't have any alternative to PO, so when election time comes again, they'll be the ones scrambling to improve our image with the public and bringing out that PiS vaccine once again.”

It would be much better if Mr Tusk were to choose the first option as his ministers, in an effort to keep their jobs, would be likely to make fewer mistakes and govern more efficiently.

But if the PM chooses to wave away the criticism currently targetted at his government, then his ministers will continue to be complacent due to the lack of pressure from above. And the mistakes will continue.

 

 

Prime Minister Donald Tusk has decided that Poland will join a European fiscal pact with 24 other EU countries, despite some of Poland's main demands not being met at a summit in Brussels on Monday.

“[The agreement] does not satisfy us 100 percent but we have decided to sign the pact,” Mr Tusk announced after the meeting of EU leaders.

Poland went into the summit demanding that it be included in all euro-zone summits, something which France in particular was opposed to, according to most reports.

The compromise agreement now states that there will be two types of euro summits. The first will concern coordination of economic policy in the euro zone, for example regarding bailout funds. These will be attended only by the euro 17.

But for summits on other matters such as the implementation of the fiscal pact itself or competition issues, non-euro members will be invited.

Right choice

Poland is right to join the fiscal union on these terms, but not because it is a great idea or because it will “save” Europe.

Indeed, the pact does not include a single fiscal restriction that does not already exist in current EU treaties. German Chancellor Angela Merkel, faced with a public that often feels disdain at German taxpayer money being used to bail out Greece, just needed to be able to flash a fresh document at home, showing that other countries will now have to be more careful about their spending habits.

Finnish Foreign Minister Erkki Tuomioja even went as far as to tell reporters that the document is “at best unnecessary and at worst damaging.”

“We are working on it because Berlin needs it in its domestic politics,” he said.

But all that is irrelevant from the point of view of Poland's interests in the EU. What Poland needs is to be as large a part of the European decision-making process as it possibly can, but without forgetting its place. Those in Poland who rail against German domination and agreements being signed to please Berlin seem to forget who has been paying the bills recently.

He who pays the piper …

If Poland were contributing hundreds of billions of euro towards bailing out financially troubled European countries, then its needs and proposals would have serious traction as well. But right now, Poland is still a net receiver of EU funds and a lot of that money comes from the German taxpayer – making staying on the good side of Germany a key plank of Poland's foreign policy.

One would be hard put to find a government in Europe that has taken a more pro-EU stance than Poland’s. Throughout the country’s six-month 2011 presidency of the EU, Prime Minister Donald Tusk and Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski repeatedly voiced their commitment to the 27-nation bloc, saying the solution to the continent’s sovereign-debt crisis was “more Europe, not less.”

The foreign minister even advocated the creation of a European federation under the leadership of Germany in a speech in Berlin last year.

As a result, Mr Tusk and Mr Sikorski were lambasted and ridiculed by right-wing politicians and media in Poland for being ready to give up the country’s sovereignty in return for nothing but a pat on the back by their “German masters.”

Told you so

Indeed, the Polish prime minister received lavish praise from European politicians for his stance, with the current European Parliament president Martin Schultz (a German) saying the Polish presidency was “one of the very best presidencies we have had.”

The Polish right, which tends to view praise for Polish politicians by their German or French counterparts as a sure sign that they are not protecting Warsaw’s interests, said Mr Tusk would get nothing for playing the nice guy.

When the PM said Poland would definitely join the proposed fiscal pact and contribute to the IMF fund meant to assist troubled euro-zone countries, the same critics said he was silly to sign up for a deal whose content was not yet known.

But since decisions made at euro-zone summits would affect non-euro EU members, Mr Tusk insisted he would fight to be allowed to participate (not necessarily vote) at the meetings as decisions made there would affect Poland as well.

His critics sneered in doubt, and the euro zone’s decision-makers are now proving them right. When it was recently revealed by the media that the latest draft of the fiscal union treaty did not envisage non-euro countries like Poland being allowed to attend euro summits, Mr Tusk sounded a very defeatist tone saying “you can’t win them all.”

“Ha....we told you so,” the naysayers gloated.

Many ordinary pro-EU Poles simply wondered why Paris and Berlin seemed to want to marginalize such a staunch ally.

It's not over yet

Since then it seems Mr Tusk has regained his fighting spirit, saying after a meeting with the Italian Prime Minister Mario Monti that cooperation between Rome and Warsaw would “serve well to complement the political initiatives by Paris and Berlin at a time when the new rules in the European Union are being worked on.”

Even more of an outright challenge to France and Germany were his words to Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera that “Europe should not be left to two capitals” and he did not want “exclusive clubs” in the EU.

The latest draft of the treaty now says that non-euro nations can attend the summits once a year. That would probably amount to Poland being invited to the summits where no important decisions are made. Although Mr Sikorski has said the negotiations are still ongoing and that “the latest drafts are going in the direction of Poland’s postulates,” the final treaty might still turn out to be an embarrassment for the Polish government.

Mr Tusk’s critics now feel vindicated. They argue that if he had been tougher from the beginning, Poland would have gotten all it wanted. That, of course, is nonsense. When the right-wing Law and Justice (PiS) was in power from 2005-2007, they practiced the kind of politics PO’s critics are advocating, banging their fists on the table any time they didn’t get their way. What did that get Poland? Precious little.

Once bitten …

But it is not surprising that this view is gaining traction, considering the way German Chancellor Angel Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy have treated Donald Tusk.

Mr Tusk’s actions seemed perfectly reasonable. He showed his intention to join the fiscal union and chip in for the IMF fund, in order to be able to “participate” at euro summits.

But the powers that be – especially France, if reports are correct – seem to think that is asking too much. They have humiliated Mr Tusk, making him seem naïve and gullible. This debacle will now make the prime minister more wary of Berlin and Paris. No strong relationship can be built on mistrust.

What’s the big deal about attending euro summits anyway? Are there secret, major decisions going to be made there that Paris doesn’t want Warsaw to know about? If not, then doing everything to shut Poland and other non-euro members out of participating in euro summits doesn’t make much sense.

Almost immediately after the start of the new year, Poland found itself engulfed in confusion due to changes the government had implemented to prescription-drug laws.

With doctors protesting the changes, many pharmacists and patients have been left confused – and in many cases extremely frustrated.

Doctors, obliged by the new regulations to state the exact level of reimbursement a patient is entitled to on a prescription (and also to verify if the patient is insured), have refused to do so, saying they simply do not have direct access to that information. In protest, many have started issuing prescriptions with a stamp saying: “reimbursement level to be decided by NFZ,” which is the National Health Fund.

As a result of the confusion, some pharmacies have chosen to play it safe, in many cases charging the full amount to patients who are entitled to steep discounts on the drugs they buy. Situations have even been reported in which cancer patients have been asked to pay up to a thousand times more than they should for drugs.

The government has responded by easing the new regulations a little, saying doctors would no longer be punished (as the new regulations had previously stated) for miscalculating the reimbursement level, or for not verifying if a patient is insured. But doctors have nevertheless continued their protests.

Off with his head

As could be expected, the main opposition party – Law and Justice (PiS) – has demanded that the health minister, Bartosz Arłukowicz, be stripped of his office, placing the responsibility for the mess on his shoulders. PiS's assessment of the situation isn't, however, entirely accurate. Mr Arłukowicz took over in November and it was his predecessor, current Sejm Speaker Ewa Kopacz, who prepared the reforms.

Two other parliamentary clubs, Solidarity Poland and Palikot's Movement, have said they will support PiS in its no-confidence vote. However, the Democratic Left Alliance has said it would rather amend the bill than dismiss Mr Arłukowicz, meaning the opposition won't have enough votes to topple the incumbent health minister, who belongs to the ruling Civic Platform party.

Mr Arłukowicz is expected to survive his baptism of fire, but let's hope the other reforms which the government is planning – such as an extension of the retirement age for men and women and the elimination of state-funded privileges for certain groups of society – will not be as poorly planned and executed as this one.