There is no formal procedure to terminate the Green Order. It is not something that can be ended with a single act. Authorities can ignore it and later face penalties, or they can push for changes that reshape the entire package. Bolesta, the Deputy Minister of Climate and Environment, described the choice as moving toward reform rather than surrender.
Bolesta reminded in an interview that the Green Order is not a single rule but a package of regulations and guidelines, a collection that runs across dozens of provisions. The scope of the package means adjustments require careful alignment with European rules and practical considerations for Polish industries that depend on energy, mining, and manufacturing sectors. The discussion underscores how policy coherence matters for households and businesses alike, a concern that also resonates with observers in Canada and the United States who watch how energy transitions are managed in other democracies.
There are elements that are not welcome, such as a border date tied to registering new combustion vehicles or the ETS2 mechanism that directly affects EU residents with higher costs for heating and transport. At the same time, some components are seen as beneficial, notably the transformation fund from which Poles predominantly benefit. The question of allocating billions for transformation surfaces clearly, and the response from policymakers is that these funds are needed, among other things, to support mining regions, where jobs and regional development are tightly linked to the pace and scope of the transition.
Bolesta noted that such adjustments cannot be picked apart piece by piece without consequences. When asked whether individual elements could be expressed or excised, he compared the situation to daily life, saying that one cannot sign a contract with a bank unilaterally and avoid penalties. He stressed that the regulations are currently part of the European legal order and binding across member states, a reality that shapes how Poland negotiates changes while honoring its obligations to the EU framework.
For that reason, the ministry is actively seeking coalitions with other states and engaging with EU committees to seek modifications to certain provisions. The aim is to shape the rules in a way that preserves national interests while meeting EU standards and ensuring smoother implementation. The approach reflects a pragmatic path, where cross-border cooperation and mutual adjustments are viewed as essential to balancing energy security, environmental goals, and regional economic needs.
A reporter noted that some elements, such as ETS2, are not yet transposed into Polish law, which invites debate over how strictly they should be treated. Bolesta responded that several solutions have not yet been implemented in Polish legislation; ignoring them is possible but risky because failing to transpose these rules can incur sanctions, a dynamic echoed in discussions about enforcement and penalties by EU bodies. The path forward will likely require careful legal alignment to avoid penalties and to ensure compliance, a process that ultimately involves both national authorities and Brussels institutions, as observed by policy outlets familiar with the EU legal order. As reported by wPolityce