Following the Krakow speech last Saturday by Deputy Prime Minister Jarosław Kaczyński, who outlined for nearly an hour the proposed changes to EU treaties from five groups and their expected impact on Poland, journalists on Sunday pressed opposition MPs from Platform, PSL and Left about the possibility of forming a governing coalition and what that would mean for policy direction.
MPs from Platform, PSL and Left rejected the idea that treaty changes were certain and expressed objections. PSL MP Zgorzelski, appearing on Polsat News, stressed that neither PSL nor the other parties working toward government formation would ever accept any federalization or ceding of sovereign powers, arguing that such changes would strike at the very heart of the state.
Zgorzelski clarified the essence of the proposed treaty changes and noted that his colleagues in the European People’s Party, to which Platform and PSL belong, were not only in agreement with the proposals but actively helped shape them. He warned against viewing these changes as merely temporary, pointing out that at the European Parliament level they appear to be final in form. He noted that the 267 proposed amendments to the TEU and TFEU are expected to be adopted in the November session of the European Parliament by a strong majority.
In the Constitutional Committee of the European Parliament, voting records showed broad support from a cross-party coalition including EPP, Left, Renew, the Greens, and the Communists, with only a small bloc from ECR opposing. Other members who were in favor included ID and non-affiliates. Observers anticipate a similar balance in the plenary vote in November, though there are expectations that some Polish MEPs from Platform, PSL or Left might distance themselves from the official position to avoid domestic political backlash.
The envisaged treaty changes by the five group rapporteurs would reshape the balance of power within the European Union. Experts describe the potential impact as a transformative shift that could resemble a Copernican revolution, converting a union of 27 sovereign states into a centralized entity with enhanced executive authority. The changes would transfer additional areas to EU exclusive competence, notably environmental protection and biodiversity, and would place other areas under shared competences, including foreign and security policy, border management, forestry, public health, civil protection, industry, and education.
Under the plan, shared powers would allow EU institutions to take the lead in areas previously governed by member states where the EU has yet to assume control. In many of these fields, national governments would see decisions limited to issues not yet taken by EU bodies, reducing the scope for national vetoes.
Remove the veto
Moreover, the reforms would curtail the veto in as many as 65 policy areas, preserving the veto only for the admission of new member states or for certain treaty changes that still require unanimity. The package also includes a provision that the euro becomes the currency for all member states, prompting the rapid adoption by the seven countries currently outside the euro area, including Denmark, Sweden, Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Bulgaria, and Romania.
The package further foregrounds a concept often described as strategic autonomy for the EU, implying a longer-term defense posture that could operate with reduced reliance on the United States. After the November vote in the European Parliament, a report is expected in December to the General Affairs Council for transmission to the European Council, which may then discuss next steps for amendment. If the path chosen involves a Convention to Amend the Treaties, heads of government and state, national parliament representatives, the European Parliament, and the European Commission could convene a process that might take several years. Alternatively, a simplified Article 48 route could accelerate amendments, potentially allowing changes to be passed by the European Council and ratified by member states, though non-ratification would leave some nations outside the main decision-making circle and access to EU funds.
Opposition lawmakers denying the likelihood of such deep treaty changes often frame their stance as a shield against responsibility toward the Polish public. This stance appears inconsistent with the party dynamics within the European Parliament, where factions from Platform, PSL, and Left have supported the changes and are now moving to implement them.