The left-wing coalition initiated by The Green Party and the Association FAIR Society has reached a decision to propose Anna Grodzka as a candidate in the elections for the President of Poland.
Anna Grodzka, deputy in the Polish Parliament and a member of the Green Party, is a candidate of the Green Party and the social left, elected by the Steering Committee “Primaries for the Society’s Candidate for the Polish President”. The Committee was established on January 24, 2015 by the members of fourteen organizations, including the Green Party, Association FAIR Society, The Humanistic Society, Free Radom, The Institute for Global Responsibility, The Stop-Stereotypes Association, The Modern Left, The Feminoteka Foundation, The Suwak (Zipper/Slider) Association, The Independent Institute of Social-Political Thought, The Polish Tenants Association, The Polish Society of Rationalists, The A.F. Modrzewski Foundation, and Ecological Association EKO-Unia.
The Committe works according to an open-ended formula, allowing all organizations and institutions which share the principles contained in the Program Manifesto adopted by the Committee to join in. The aim of the Committee was to propose a common candidate, a person who would offer a genuine left-wing alternative to the President now in office and to the candidates of the mainstream parties.
In the manifesto of the Committee the candidate is presented as a person who will actively protect the interests of the society, and will stop Poland being treated as the reservoir of cheap labour. The candidate will also defend the economic and social rights of the Polish people. The aim is to create in Poland conditions for sustainable, harmonious economic growth and for social solidarity. The candidate of the social left is also interested in supporting energetic transformation of the Polish economy, in the direction of dispersed, prosument, renewable energy. But the main objective of the candidate is to invigorate and renew Polish democracy, to safeguard the secular character of the Polish state, to make the political system more transparent, and to secure true participation of Polish citizens in the process of political decision-making, while guaranteeing the influence of all citizens on the economy in accordance with workplace democracy.
The Committe agreed that Anna Grodzka will best represent the values of the social left in the forthcoming presidential elections, and will actively pursue the established goals.
During the Press conference, organized on February 13, 2015, at 12.00 noon in the headquarters of the Polish Press Agency (PAP ul.Bracka 6/8), the candidate appointed by the Committee, Anna Grodzka, will officially open her presidential campaign.
(Translation: Daniel Arciszewski)
Showing posts with label elections in Poland. Show all posts
Showing posts with label elections in Poland. Show all posts
Monday, 9 February 2015
Friday, 7 January 2011
How Poland became greener in 2010
2010 was a strange year for Poland, with the Smoleńsk tragedy and its aftermath, early presidential elections, and floods. Also for the Greens, it was a long and unusual year, a year of breaking through. The electoral breakthrough in the local elections in November, with our first ever elected councillors and members of regional parliaments, did not happen in a void. First there were significant changes within the Green Party, as well as important changes in the general political context.
The sense of breaking through first came to my mind in April, during Green Party Conference. At the Conference we accepted four policy documents, precising our aims and values in the domain of electoral law, social policy, health service, and education. The discussion was informed, passionate, and fruitful. The new policy documents resolved a prolonged tension within the party concerning our stance on social and economic policies. It gave our leaders and activists a tremendous sense of empowerment.
Then there was a series of changes in the political situation. In the presidential elections, the Greens supported Grzegorz Napieralski, the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). His political programme proved closer to the Green vision than the programme of any other candidate. Then there were long and difficult talks about a coalition in the local elections. We achieved an agreement, and in the November elections many Green candidates (though not all) ran on Social Democratic ballot. Now we have two members of regional parliaments: Małgorzata Tkacz-Janik (co-leader of the Greens) in Silesia and Ewa Koś in West Pommerania, and three members of municipal councils: Beata Kubica in Opole, Krystian Legierski in Warsaw and Sebastian Kotlarz in the rural commune of Kąty Wielkie. Sebastian Kotlarz was elected as an independent Green candidate in a first-past-the-post constituency, he highlighted his Feminist convictions in his campaign. Krystian Legierski is not only the first Green councillors in Warsaw, but also the first out gay candidate elected to a political office in Poland; we have made history.
But there was also an important breakthrough in Polish media. In 2010, two strong taboos were definitely broken. First, there is no longer a taboo concerning the Church and State relations in Poland. Until August 2010, the overwhelming majority of Polish people discontent with the dominant position of the Catholic Church in political life or its economic privileges had been virtually voiceless and invisible. Those who would question the privileges of the Church would be often dismissed as 'extremists.' Now it has all changed. The position of the Church started to lose its unquestionable status in April, when the Church supported the controversial burial of the late president Lech Kaczyński in the Wawel Cathedral. Then the media started to discuss the workings of the Property Commission that was responsible for transfering to the Church institutions valuable properties and tremendous sums of money on grounds that seem quite unclear, to say the least. And then there was a conflict about the cross put by scouts in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw in the days of Smoleńsk mourning. On 9th August, a huge crowd of young people come to demand the displacement of the cross and a closer separation of Church and State. Now it is evident that anticlerical demands have supporters ready to come out and defend their right to be heard.
And there is also a second taboo that did not survive the turbulences of 2010. It is the Polish system of pensions introduced by the infamous government of Jerzy Buzek. Until recently, it was unquestionable. Now, even some neoliberal experts denounce it as irrational and costly. So there is also much more space for its progressive critics to speak out.
The Greens start the new year empowered -- with our new programme, with our councillors, and with media more open to debate. But 2011 will also be a year of challenges, parliamentary elections and debate on nuclear energy in Poland not least important among them.
Adam Ostolski
The sense of breaking through first came to my mind in April, during Green Party Conference. At the Conference we accepted four policy documents, precising our aims and values in the domain of electoral law, social policy, health service, and education. The discussion was informed, passionate, and fruitful. The new policy documents resolved a prolonged tension within the party concerning our stance on social and economic policies. It gave our leaders and activists a tremendous sense of empowerment.
| Małgorzata Tkacz-Janik (photo from Wikipedia) |
But there was also an important breakthrough in Polish media. In 2010, two strong taboos were definitely broken. First, there is no longer a taboo concerning the Church and State relations in Poland. Until August 2010, the overwhelming majority of Polish people discontent with the dominant position of the Catholic Church in political life or its economic privileges had been virtually voiceless and invisible. Those who would question the privileges of the Church would be often dismissed as 'extremists.' Now it has all changed. The position of the Church started to lose its unquestionable status in April, when the Church supported the controversial burial of the late president Lech Kaczyński in the Wawel Cathedral. Then the media started to discuss the workings of the Property Commission that was responsible for transfering to the Church institutions valuable properties and tremendous sums of money on grounds that seem quite unclear, to say the least. And then there was a conflict about the cross put by scouts in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw in the days of Smoleńsk mourning. On 9th August, a huge crowd of young people come to demand the displacement of the cross and a closer separation of Church and State. Now it is evident that anticlerical demands have supporters ready to come out and defend their right to be heard.
And there is also a second taboo that did not survive the turbulences of 2010. It is the Polish system of pensions introduced by the infamous government of Jerzy Buzek. Until recently, it was unquestionable. Now, even some neoliberal experts denounce it as irrational and costly. So there is also much more space for its progressive critics to speak out.
The Greens start the new year empowered -- with our new programme, with our councillors, and with media more open to debate. But 2011 will also be a year of challenges, parliamentary elections and debate on nuclear energy in Poland not least important among them.
Adam Ostolski
Friday, 9 July 2010
A new opening for the Left (and Greens)
![]() | |
| May Day: Greens march with trade unions and SLD (photo by Alicja Szymczak) |
It is in this context that the result of Grzegorz Napieralski, the leader of the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), also supported by the Greens, is considered to be a miracle. He obtained nearly 14 per cent of the popular vote. Were the circumstances different, it would not be that impressive. But it was deemed to be a failure. In the time of sharp polarization, with only reluctant help of most other SLD leaders, and with some of them (Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz) even openly supporting his Conservative rival Bronisław Komorowski, he was expected to win no more than 3 or 5 per cent of the vote.
But why is it a new opening for the Left? And, even more so, for the Greens?
Napieralski showed his political cunning in not supporting either Komorowski or Jarosław Kaczyński in the second round. He let them struggle for the minds and hearts of his voters by including left-wing agenda in their programmes. And they did it, or at least they did try. Komorowski started to talk about public financing of in vitro fertilization, 35 per cent obligatory quotas for women on the lists to Parliament, and cheaper railway tickets for students. Kaczyński raised the issues of labour relations, public health care and the model of welfare state. He even called the institution of permanent employment contract "one of the very fundaments of our civilization." So, progressive agenda unexpectedly appeared in the very center of debate between... two right wing candidates.
But obviously, it is not the Right that is going to represent this agenda in the future. But will the Left be able to do it? Napieralski declares he wants to cleanse his party of neoliberal elements that proved so unuseful and even disloyal during his presidential campaign. He probably will attempt a renewal of the SLD in a close cooperation with the Greens, the Women's Party, and trade unions. If only he is consistent and determined, he can transform SLD from the party of postcommunist establishment into a genuine Social Democracy. And this would open the way, in Poland, for a more progressive future.
Adam Ostolski
Wednesday, 30 June 2010
Two short comments on the ongoing elections in Poland
Quoted in Le Journal du Dimanche (20th June) about the rise in support for Jarosław Kaczyński among young voters: Pologne: Le face-à-face des droites. In NRC next (21st June) about the good result of pro-gay left candidate Grzegorz Napieralski: Homovriendelijke kandidaat deed het goed in Polen.
Monday, 17 May 2010
If animals could vote
For left-wing voters, there does not seem to be a big choice in the coming presidential elections. Both major candidates, Bronisław Komorowski (Civic Platform) and Jarosław Kaczyński (Law and Justice) happen to be right-wingers. Their is no substantial difference in what they say on the war in Afghanistan, NATO, nuclear energy, women's and LGBT rights, relations between the State and the Church, and so on. There is a trade union link in the case of Kaczyński, making him look a bit more "pro-social" of the two, but he is far from the "one-nation Conservative" image of his late brother Lech. Although he is visibly more cautious about privatisation than Komorowski, and much more supportive of the public health care system, he still boasts about his government having lowered taxes (for the rich, to be sure). Even those differences taken into account, no impressive choice for a progressive voter anyway.
Oddly enough, this creates an occasion for hitherto neglected topics to come into the fore. The issue of animal rights, or rather of the complex relations between humans and animals, appears to be quite important. At least, it enables one to really distinguish between the two main rivals. One of them lives with a cat, while the other is a devoted hunter. As it can be seen on the banner profligated by the (hitherto unknown) Animal Protection Party:

The fact of Komorowski's killing animals for pleasure is being raised not only by animal rights activists, but also by some of his right wing opponents. The pro-Kaczyński "Rzeczpospolita" published at least two cartoons about the hunting candidate (both by Andrzej Krauze). One of them displays a "Honorary Committee of support for the Hunter" in form of a row of hanged animal corpses, while the other represents voting as a unanimous action by a herd of frightened-to-death animals.
The other side raises the issue of human-animal relations as well. Last Sunday, on the inauguration of the Honorary Committee of support for Komorowski, Professor Władysław Bartoszewski (Poland's former minister of foreign affairs) made an allusion to Kaczyński's being a bachelor: "If Poland is to be degraded to the Rwanda's or Burundi's level of world's attention, it would be the best reason to vote for a man who has the experience in raising fur-bearing animals, but does not have the experience of being a father." This is a wonderful example of how racist, homophobic, and speciesist formulations may still pave their way into the mainstream of respectable political discourse. Though I would not bet it helps.
Anyway, it is fascinating to watch how new topics emerge as a means to make a difference between the two otherwise so similar rivals. I am going to watch it carefully. And as you may have already guessed, I would be more than happy to cede my vote to one of my cats this time...
P.S. Today's news (Thursday, 19 May): Komorowski gives up hunting. Good news. Maybe animals cannot vote, but it seems they sometimes do count.
Adam Ostolski
Oddly enough, this creates an occasion for hitherto neglected topics to come into the fore. The issue of animal rights, or rather of the complex relations between humans and animals, appears to be quite important. At least, it enables one to really distinguish between the two main rivals. One of them lives with a cat, while the other is a devoted hunter. As it can be seen on the banner profligated by the (hitherto unknown) Animal Protection Party:

I KILL ANIMALS BECAUSE I LIKE IT. VOTE FOR ME!
The fact of Komorowski's killing animals for pleasure is being raised not only by animal rights activists, but also by some of his right wing opponents. The pro-Kaczyński "Rzeczpospolita" published at least two cartoons about the hunting candidate (both by Andrzej Krauze). One of them displays a "Honorary Committee of support for the Hunter" in form of a row of hanged animal corpses, while the other represents voting as a unanimous action by a herd of frightened-to-death animals.
The other side raises the issue of human-animal relations as well. Last Sunday, on the inauguration of the Honorary Committee of support for Komorowski, Professor Władysław Bartoszewski (Poland's former minister of foreign affairs) made an allusion to Kaczyński's being a bachelor: "If Poland is to be degraded to the Rwanda's or Burundi's level of world's attention, it would be the best reason to vote for a man who has the experience in raising fur-bearing animals, but does not have the experience of being a father." This is a wonderful example of how racist, homophobic, and speciesist formulations may still pave their way into the mainstream of respectable political discourse. Though I would not bet it helps.
Anyway, it is fascinating to watch how new topics emerge as a means to make a difference between the two otherwise so similar rivals. I am going to watch it carefully. And as you may have already guessed, I would be more than happy to cede my vote to one of my cats this time...
P.S. Today's news (Thursday, 19 May): Komorowski gives up hunting. Good news. Maybe animals cannot vote, but it seems they sometimes do count.
Adam Ostolski
Friday, 24 July 2009
Everyone's ally
Farfał's neo-Nazi past is hardly a revelation. The photos give graphic evidence to what has been known from the very beginning of his public career. It was already disclosed by the "Gazeta Wyborcza" soon after Farfał's nomination to the Board of Public TV in May 2006. At the time, the far-right League of Polish Families (LPR) happened to be a highly uncomfortable, and yet indispensable ally in the ruling coalition led by Law and Justice (PiS). Scandals concerning the behaviour of All-Polish Youth (LPR's youth organization) emerged from time to time, and Hitler salute even came to be re-christened as "one more beer, please!" (People trying to play down the importance of All-Polish Youth's dangerous affinities claimed that the gesture was not actually Hitler salute, but a natural pose of young men ordering another pint of beer...) Law and Justice did not seem to be happy with its allies from League of Polish Families and Self-Defense, but they desperately needed allies anyway. It was within this context that LPR pushed Farfał as their candidate to the board of TVP. Even the revelations of his neo-Nazi past were not sufficient to challenge his position.
Law and Justice lost power in the wake of snap election in Autumn 2007. Civic Platform (PO) formed a new coalition government with Polish People's Party (PSL). But Farfał could feel safe as a member of the board. PO wanted to change the Board of the Public TV, to be sure, but there was no hurry. Their ambition was broader than just a personal purge. They wanted also to "reform" the institution itself. A new media law not only enabled the replacement of the enemy's team, but was also paving the way for the privatisation of public media. In April 2008, the law was passed through the Parliament, but it was vetoed by President Kaczyński. The President was opposed to the prospect of creeping privatisation of TVP, and probably also wanted to protect PiS' control over it (or vice versa). In order to overturn the veto, PO needed support from either Law and Justice or Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). And they proved unable -- or unwilling -- to gain it. Farfał and his colleagues could still feel secure in his post.
And this was not the end... In Autumn 2008 there was a conflict within the board of TVP between members connected with LPR and Self-Defense on the one hand, and members connected with PiS on the other. Both LPR and Self-Defense, now extraparliamentary, wanted more visibility in public media, hoping it will help them to prepare a comeback. And there was also a conflict around Piotr Farfał himself. In December 2008 a mutiny finally happened, the CEO Andrzej Urbański was suspended and Piotr Farfał became the Acting CEO in his place. PiS lost control over the public TV. And for the following five months Civic Platform seemed totally incapable of taking action to replace the board.
Was it really? Let's play with a perverse thought. What if Farfał as the CEO of the public TV was a tacit ally of the ruling party once again, Civic Platform this time? As the Acting CEO he took care to have views and activities of his far-right friends appropriately covered. Six months before the European elections it was invaluable. LPR joined forces with Declan Ganley's Libertas, so Libertas gained a tool to attract public attention. It helped. TVP was quite favourable towards Libertas, whereas liberal media were definitely hostile. But both were equally unfriendly towards Law and Justice. And both talked about Libertas incessantly, much more than about any other minor party. Was it turning the attention of eurosceptic voters away from Law and Justice, the Civic Platform's ultimate enemy other? It could have done it. And if the electoral achievements of far-right proved finally so miserable, it may well be because there are not so many eurosceptic voters in Poland after all.
To the end of May, some two weeks before the elections, a miracle happened. Civic Platform decided not to tolerate Farfał any more. A new media law was passed through the Parliament, almost effortlessly. The President does not seem happier with it than he had been with the previous incarnation, and he will almost certainly try to block it. The new law is, in essence, a double invitation: let's get rid of Farfał and -- at the same time -- let's open the door for privatisation by stealth. Diabolic offer, isn't it? It would probably have worked very well in January or February, still long before the elections, when the Law and Justice's need to replace Farfał was urgent. It will probably work even now, if the Social Democrats help PO to reject presidential veto. Will they? Is SLD ready to accept the prospect of privatisation of public media? I think so, but only if they get something in exchange. Not Farfał's head, to be sure, he is nothing but a token, but some real gains for the party. If they decide to support the PO's new media law, getting rid of Farfał will serve as a good excuse to accept the dismantling of public media at the same time.
Adam Ostolski
Thursday, 16 July 2009
More of the same, or Poland after the elections
What is the result of recent European elections in Poland? The answer is not as obvious as it may seem. Each of four major parties may claim a success of its own. But the real victor is the Political Cartel itself, i.e. those same four parties considered as a whole. Though they constantly fight with each other, at the same time they have one interest in common: to prevent any political rival from beyond the Cartel from getting into the mainstream. And they proved perfectly capable of achieving this goal.
The result is a success for the Civic Platform (PO). They confirmed their position as the biggest party on the Polish scene. But it is also a success for the Law and Justice (PiS). They confirmed their position of the biggest opposition party and the only right-wing alternative for the Civic Platform. And it is also a success for the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). They proved to be the only major left-wing party in Poland. And it is a success for the Polish People's Party (PSL). They confirmed that they do have an independent position, even though they are a minor partner in the ruling coalition.
The elections proved a disaster for all other parties. The populist parties (League of Polish Families and Self-Defence) proved unable to seriously challenge Law and Justice. Both the centre-left coalition of Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals, and the anti-capitalist Polish Labour Party (PPP) proved unable to articulate (or create) electorates of their own.
Is it Polish voters that do not need an alternative? Or is it the alternative that has not been delivered to its potential supporters? Anyway, the political scene in Poland seems to be carved in concrete. I know that even a small seed of a tree is sometimes able to subvert apparently solid concrete constructions. But how to translate a metaphor into a political strategy?
Adam Ostolski
The result is a success for the Civic Platform (PO). They confirmed their position as the biggest party on the Polish scene. But it is also a success for the Law and Justice (PiS). They confirmed their position of the biggest opposition party and the only right-wing alternative for the Civic Platform. And it is also a success for the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). They proved to be the only major left-wing party in Poland. And it is a success for the Polish People's Party (PSL). They confirmed that they do have an independent position, even though they are a minor partner in the ruling coalition.
The elections proved a disaster for all other parties. The populist parties (League of Polish Families and Self-Defence) proved unable to seriously challenge Law and Justice. Both the centre-left coalition of Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals, and the anti-capitalist Polish Labour Party (PPP) proved unable to articulate (or create) electorates of their own.
Is it Polish voters that do not need an alternative? Or is it the alternative that has not been delivered to its potential supporters? Anyway, the political scene in Poland seems to be carved in concrete. I know that even a small seed of a tree is sometimes able to subvert apparently solid concrete constructions. But how to translate a metaphor into a political strategy?
Adam Ostolski
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

