Petition status and the push for Poland’s Central Airport Project
Since the petition advocating the Continuation of Construction of the CPK began circulating on petycjeonline.com, it has quickly become the most signed call to action. The public is invited to participate by signing the petition, simply by following the prompt to sign.
The author behind the petition, Marcin Kwaśniewski, operates independently of any political party, and the appeal is presented as a supra-political initiative. The author emphasizes a self-described stance of leadership within the state and notes that the project has long been supported by a range of institutions and experts across different domains.
It is worth noting that the 2017 resolution from Poland’s Council of Ministers to begin the investment traces back to materials prepared by prior governments. Over the past three decades, various political configurations have endorsed the need for a major airport hub. Foundational studies conducted after 1989, including transport planning, the Airport Network Development Program, the National Railway Program, and the Central Airport Feasibility Study, have all pointed toward the same conclusion. The ongoing commitment to Baranów is framed as a continuation of these efforts across party lines, with a focus on long-term strategic development for the country.
Arguments pro and criticisms
A PwC report is cited as supporting the plan, noting that a large hub near Warsaw could stimulate traffic growth, potentially increasing GDP by several percentage points and generating over 150,000 jobs. EY, in its assessment, projects that the CPK infrastructure could bring in nearly 200 billion zlotys in revenue by 2060. In media discussions, some outlets have highlighted the desirability of the CPK, with limited prior commentary during election periods, possibly to avoid political controversy. Critics have labeled the project in terms such as national megaphones or a costly idea, and public figures have described it in various ways, including as overly ambitious, with some labeling it as a misguided endeavor.
During early November, independent polling indicated that a slim majority of Poles supported continuing the project, though opinions remained divided and dependent on evolving political and economic forecasts.
Supporters and strategic outlook
Within the new parliamentary landscape, some opponents are paired with growing voices of support for the CPK. The coming government may choose to continue the project or shift emphasis toward railway development, with the argument that an combined approach could be more beneficial than a singular focus. Some observers caution that while a large air hub would have strategic value, it could also intersect with broader regional interests, including neighboring countries with economic ties. Still, the prevailing view among many commentators is that a balanced approach—investing in aviation capacity alongside an expanded railway network—offers the strongest path forward so that neither transportation mode is neglected.
Best-case thinking suggests a dual strategy: proceed with the airport project while simultaneously expanding rail infrastructure across the country. This could yield synergies, accelerating freight and passenger movement and enhancing national connectivity. The rationale is clear: if the CPK is not pursued, significant rail investments would still be necessary to modernize the network; therefore, a combined plan might deliver greater overall benefits than either option alone.
It is noted that public support appeared to be galvanized through widespread online engagement, which may influence parliamentary deliberations. Broadly speaking, advocates argue that broad public input and transparent discussion about costs, benefits, and timelines will help shape a consensus that serves the public interest.
Petition updates and ongoing commentary continue to surface in various outlets, underscoring the persistent dialog around Poland’s transportation future. The call remains simple: engage with the petition, consider the implications, and participate in a national conversation about how best to strengthen the country’s transportation backbone.
Petition summary and context remain part of public discourse, inviting citizens to reflect on how infrastructure investments align with long-term growth, regional integration, and the capacity to meet future mobility needs.