Ilona Jasyk, a farmer and vice-president of OPZZ Farmers and Agricultural Organizations, found herself barred from a meeting with the Prime Minister despite having attended prior sessions. In a conversation with wPolityce pl, she shared that she had learned Deputy Minister Kołodziejczak indicated she would not be allowed to participate, even though she had been a delegate at Tuesday’s gathering with Marshal Hołownia and the Prime Minister’s Chancellery.
The core question remained: was there a clear justification for excluding Jasyk from the meeting with the Prime Minister, or was she simply told not to attend? The organizers of Tuesday’s protest reportedly used the same participant list for Thursday’s session with the Prime Minister. Jasyk, as a representative from the Opole Voivodeship, stressed that she was a legitimate delegate for that region and that Kołodziejczak ultimately chose Arkadiusz Kożuszko, an activist from Agrounia, to take part instead of her.
Jasyk recalled the moment: the decision to deny entry was definitive. She noted that the list for Thursday appeared to be crafted entirely by Kołodziejczak, even though a larger pool of 30 names existed and 10 to 15 additional people were admitted on that occasion. She questioned whether past appearances alongside Janusz Kowalski, a figure involved in a public clash with Kołodziejczak, could have influenced the decision made by Michał Kołodziejczak.
In her own words, Jasyk acknowledged her openness to meeting with any minister or politician, while insisting that disagreements among individuals should not derail essential debates about Poland’s agricultural well‑being. She argued that the real focus should be on outcomes rather than personal rivalries and described the situation as potentially childish if it were driven by personal conflicts rather than policy needs.
When asked about the motive behind Kołodziejczak’s actions, Jasyk offered a candid assessment of the dynamics at play. She emphasized that the conversation should center on substantive issues rather than personalities, calling for a mature approach as farmers and their representatives press for real improvements in the sector.
Calls for Concrete Government Action
Jasyk pressed for specific measures from Prime Minister Donald Tusk. She argued that the time for vague promises had passed and that tangible steps were needed after Thursday’s discussions. She highlighted that protests by farmers across Europe had persisted for months, with similar actions in Germany and France beginning the previous year and ongoing demonstrations in January. The expectation was clear: farmers wanted clear timelines and concrete policies, not broad statements.
According to Jasyk, the Prime Minister had not provided detailed solutions during the meeting, only promising further information the following Tuesday. She urged that any plans be explicit and actionable, rather than symbolic assurances, to address farmers’ immediate concerns.
Several practical issues were raised as urgent priorities. First, she called for measures to manage agricultural surpluses, including the possibility of imposing customs duties and finding ways to remove excess grain from the market. She warned that without effective action, farmers would struggle to store new harvests as March gives way to the busy harvest season in four months. She noted that investment and infrastructure were in place in ports, purchasing companies, mills, and farmers’ storage facilities, but stressed that decisive policy moves were essential to prevent a looming bottleneck in the market.
Regarding the Green Deal, Jasyk cautioned against suspending the framework, arguing that once suspended, it could be reversed only with difficulty. Instead, she called for a firm stance and clearer, durable solutions from the Prime Minister on Tuesday. The emphasis was on creating a robust policy that would withstand political shifts and provide farmers with stable guidance.
Throughout these discussions, the overarching message remained consistent: the agricultural sector needed practical, immediate actions paired with strategic long‑term policy direction. The exchange underscored the frustration of farmers who felt their voices were not adequately reflected in the format or composition of the talks, while the government faced pressure to deliver measurable results in a timely fashion.
Additional commentary circulated in the media about the conduct of the talks and the selection of participants. Some observers suggested that those aligned with Kołodziejczak’s approach were more likely to be admitted, while others argued that the process should be judged on the quality of the proposals rather than on personal loyalties. In this tense atmosphere, farmers remained resolute about their demand for accountability and concrete solutions that would support Polish agriculture in the near term and beyond.
Source: wPolityce