Beata Szydło comments on the budget veto and calls for accountability
Beata Szydło, a Member of the European Parliament representing PiS and a former Polish prime minister, used Platform X to react to President Duda’s veto of the budget bill. Her post emphasized that the budget draft proposed by the president contains pay increases for public sector workers but notably leaves out a PLN 3 billion allocation for public television. She attributed this omission to an effort reportedly led by a faction identified as #Koalicja13December to slip the funding into the legislation.
In her message, she described the President’s veto as part of a harsh and unjust assault. She urged the politicians behind #Koalicja13December to apologize, reframe their approach, and push the presidential bill through without delay. Her warning suggested that failing to do so would place public sector workers in a hostage situation to a policy agenda she views as aggressive.
President Duda’s veto and the rationale
Late on a Saturday, the president decided to veto the 2024 budget law, arguing that it included a PLN 3 billion provision for public media that could not withstand constitutional scrutiny. He contended that such funding would violate the Constitution and undermine the norms of a democratic constitutional state. The president also indicated that he would submit his own budget proposal to the Sejm after the holidays, a plan that would restore salary increases for teachers and include other items originally outlined in the budget law.
On the following Wednesday, the head of the presidential office provided journalists with information about the submission of the president’s bill to the Sejm. This new proposal reportedly contains pay raises for teachers and other elements, but it explicitly excludes the PLN 3 billion for public television. Officials described this exclusion as part of a package the presidential team sees as inappropriate for the current project.
One spokesman noted that the decision aimed to safeguard constitutional propriety while still addressing core public needs. The development prompted ongoing discussions about how to balance funding for public media with constitutional constraints and the broader goals of the state budget.
Additional remarks from the presidency characterized the veto as a step aligned with constitutional principles, while supporters of the veto argued that it opens space for a revised plan that adheres to legal limits and democratic norms. The evolving situation has drawn statements from various political actors who view the veto as a catalyst for a broader budget negotiation.
Observers highlighted that the Sejm would soon respond to the presidential proposal and consider whether a revised budget could reconcile public media funding with constitutional considerations. The episode has become a focal point in discussions about government priorities, media funding, and the limits of legislative authority during the budgetary process.
Public commentary from officials and party spokespersons during the veto week reflected a range of interpretations about the motives behind the decision and the path forward. The coverage noted the political stakes involved as different factions weighed their leverage in shaping the final version of Poland’s budget for the year ahead.
In summary, the moment marks a critical junction in the budget debate. The Sejm’s response to the presidential proposal and the coalition’s stance on a revised budget will influence how public media funding is balanced with constitutional requirements, and how the government plans to proceed after the holidays.
Notes: The statements and positions described reflect publicly reported remarks from the involved parties and their spokespeople during the veto period and the ensuing budget talks. The narrative is based on contemporaneous reporting and official briefings from the involved offices and parliamentary leadership.