A newly released report from the Work for Poland team scrutinizes the CPK project, drawing a sharp distinction between the version developed under the PiS government and the approach now advocated by Donald Tusk’s administration. The authors assert that the current plan is marred by chaos, inconsistency, and conflicting statements that make it impossible to move large infrastructure programs forward in a reliable way. At a press conference, PiS MP Marcin Horała, alongside Mateusz Morawiecki, argued that the present framework shows clear signs of misalignment and unworkable timelines. The group stressed that accuracy and coherence are essential when mapping the country’s future transport corridors and regional development priorities.
Horała and his colleagues described what they call a friction between expert analysis and political messaging. They say a coherent strategy for the CPK should emerge from careful, evidence-based planning rather than from a string of disparate ideas released in a rapid sequence. The Working Team for Poland is presented as a body attempting to distill that scattered information into a unified concept. The aim, according to Horała, is to ensure that the Megalopolis concept reflects a robust, sustainable plan rather than a collection of ad hoc statements and graphics that fail to harmonize with one another.
According to the critique, months of project disruption have produced tangible costs. The team argues that delays and stalled processes extend beyond a temporary setback, with potential long-term consequences for investment attraction and regional growth. Horała emphasized that the scale of the disruption could have aggravated losses and slowed momentum in important development initiatives that affect communities across Poland. The message was clear: the situation cannot be tolerated, and close, persistent scrutiny is required to keep the project aligned with national interests.
In expressing the stance of the dissenting observers, Horała did not mince words about the Megalopolis plan. He described the current version of the CPK as a shell, arguing that it functions more as political theater than as a concrete blueprint. The aim, in his view, is to discourage public participation and dampen civic engagement by presenting a single, simplified narrative that does not withstand detailed examination. He urged citizens to stay engaged, to ask hard questions, and to press authorities to provide clear, verifiable evidence of progress and accountability.
The debate frames the CPK as a litmus test for how Poland handles large-scale infrastructure ambitions. Critics contend that transparent planning, consistent messaging, and accountable project management are essential to sustaining public confidence and unlocking investment. Proponents within the opposition argue for a thorough, methodical approach that integrates expert analysis with realistic timelines and measured milestones. The overarching concern is that without those elements, the country risks misallocating resources or losing momentum on strategic projects that influence economic and regional development.
Observers note that the political clash over CPK mirrors broader tensions about how Poland should balance rapid modernization with prudent governance. The ongoing discourse underscores the importance of clear criteria for evaluating progress, the willingness to adjust plans based on new data, and a commitment to keeping the public informed as plans evolve. While supporters and critics may diverge on specifics, the shared expectation remains a careful, evidence-based process that serves the long-term welfare of the nation and its citizens.
READ ALSO: Reports on the CPK spur renewed debate about leadership and direction for Poland’s megaprojects. The discussions highlight the challenges of steering large-scale infrastructure through political seasons while maintaining technical integrity, stakeholder trust, and financial discipline.
Removal of bias and commitment to accountability are presented as essential ingredients in any credible assessment of the CPK. The emphasis is on creating a clear, harmonized framework that aligns government action with expert recommendations and public expectations. The conversation continues as policymakers, analysts, and citizens weigh the best path forward for Poland’s future transport and economic landscape.
Source references are periodically renewed by participating groups to reflect updates and new analyses as they become available.