Polish mines are secure not only because a methane compromise in the European Parliament was achieved, but also because the ruling party frames energy strategy as a cornerstone of national sovereignty, explains Izabela Kloc in an interview conducted for wPolityce.pl.
The European Parliament backed the compromise amendments to the methane regulation. Poland asked for her perspective on the issue, noting the long effort to secure favorable outcomes for the country in this area.
wPolityce.pl: What exactly did the effort yield?
Izabela Kloc, MEP for Law and Justice: To grasp what was at stake, one should review the sequence of events surrounding the EU methane regulation. The process began with a proposal from the European Commission that echoed a strict Fit for 55 approach. Brussels proposed a threshold of 0.5 tonnes of methane per 1,000 tonnes of coal mined. That standard would have devastated Polish mining, given current technological limits. Many mines would have faced closure by 2027. There was a glimmer of hope from the Council of the European Union, which managed to push the limit beyond 5 tonnes. That represented a notable win for Poland, considering the limited coal allies in Brussels. After the Commission and Council positions were set, the Parliament needed to decide. The initial stance did not favor Poland. When Kloc became shadow rapporteur for the methane regulation in the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, some colleagues celebrated while others doubted Poland could prevail. The Green group’s Jutta Paulus was the rapporteur for the file and initially supported the Commission’s 0.5 tonne proposal. Numerous commentators believed that option stood the best chance, yet persistent coalition-building began to bear fruit. Kloc secured backing from influential MEPs, including Jens Geier, the German shadow rapporteur for the Group of Socialists and Democrats. The breakthrough emerged at a meeting of MEPs working on the draft methane regulation, leading to a compromise permitting 5 tonnes of methane, ten times the Commission’s request. The mechanism centers on calculating emissions for an operator, such as Polska Grupa Górnicza, allowing more flexibility for companies. Crucially, a provision was introduced letting interested Member States replace fines with emission charges, returning funds to operators to finance methane-reduction projects. The plenary vote followed, with 499 MEPs casting a decisive vote in favor of the approach in the spirit of EU solidarity.
How will the EP’s decision affect Poland?
Dominik Kolorz, the leader of Silesian Dąbrowa’s Solidarity, framed it succinctly in a statement: the methane ordinance, as adopted by the Parliament, remains a burden on the mining sector but no longer imposes a death sentence. The 5-tonne limit remains high for Polish mines, yet the agreement includes a range of detailed provisions that bring tangible benefits. Most importantly, it offers room to advance the social contract between the government and labor, ensuring mine operations can continue under a framework up to 2049.
Nearly all Polish MEPs voted in concert. What does that imply?
Kloc urges cross-party cooperation on issues vital to national interests, urging colleagues to bury domestic disputes and vote for Poland’s benefit. During the methane debate, visible cross-faction support emerged, including contributions from groups such as the European Conservatives and Reformists, the European People’s Party, and Socialists and Democrats. The aim, she notes, is not to let methane become a precedent but to set a new standard for collaboration among Polish MEPs. Whether this optimistic outlook sustains through the next stages remains uncertain, especially with domestic political tensions preceding elections that could influenceEuropean Parliament attitudes.
Can it be said that Polish mines are safe?
Polish mines are secure not solely because of the methane compromise. The rule of law and justice party is presented as a key protector of the mining sector, prioritizing energy security within the national agenda. The country’s energy mix remains heavy on coal, with lignite contributing a substantial share, while renewables still occupy a smaller portion. The plan to close mines by 2049 is not arbitrary; it reflects careful research, forecasting, and simulations. The persistence of energy sovereignty is framed as the core condition for safety in the sector.
Is publicizing the battle a way to challenge the majority’s monopoly in Brussels?
The methane regulation has sparked unexpected friction within the Parliament’s majority. The red-green-rainbow bloc has been influential enough to sway both the Socialists and Democrats and the EPP at times. The debate has perhaps opened eyes to a shift away from climate radicalism. It is not portrayed as a game changer, but as a sign that challenging the current power balance in Brussels is possible. The next European elections could bring a renewed sense of freedom and a potential reversal of negative dynamics attributed to aggressive climate policies.