Briefing from the Prime Minister’s Chancellery on the migration talks
At yesterday’s session held in the Prime Minister’s Chancellery, the attendance from the Democratic Opposition was limited to the president of PSL, Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz. Delegations from the left, Poland 2050, and KO chose not to participate. Marek Sawicki, a PSL member of parliament, shared striking details in an interview with the wPolityce.pl portal, focusing on the stance of KO in this matter.
Marek Sawicki responds to opposition figures who criticized taking part in the gathering organized by the Prime Minister’s Chancellery.
If politicians insist on retreating into their own bubbles, avoiding face-to-face dialogue while engaging audiences on platforms like TikTok, then that is not politics in the traditional sense. There should be not only the courage to use modern communication channels but also the willingness to address opponents directly and honestly. Kosiniak-Kamysz attended the meeting and spoke plainly, Sawicki notes.
He adds that TikTok is widely used by many Polish politicians, and among opposition leaders, Donald Tusk has recently relied on this platform to reach the public.
After eight years under PiS, the PSL has participated in numerous consultations. Sawicki views the current scenario as one where PiS is leveraging the dispute politically and arranging the meeting with a strategic motive. He suggests that had the entire opposition attended, PiS’s position could have been challenged and the government might have lost a key advantage related to the migration pact.
“PiS set a trap for the opposition,” Sawicki asserts, underscoring that the discussion on visa procedures for immigrants, which the government later withdrew, was essential. He also contends that Donald Tusk and Szymon Hołownia would likely have joined the session if they had received a direct invitation.
According to Sawicki, PiS invited not the party leaders but representatives from clubs and circles, a move he interprets as a tactical ploy. He believes that direct invitations to Tusk and Hołownia might have altered the course of the meeting.
“They were considering attending the meeting.”
The PSL MP relays what he has heard from PO politicians. He claims the PO hesitated at the last moment about attending the gathering at the Chancellery, with Donald Tusk ultimately declining the idea.
There was uncertainty about who should participate, with discussions about Kierwiński or Budka taking place. Tusk’s decision to withdraw was framed as a judgment that the party would be unable to defend a coherent narrative in those talks. Budka reportedly wavered until the final moment about attending, but was advised against participating due to concerns about appearing unprepared for the discussions.
Sawicki states that the democratic opposition generally took a firm stance, mirroring Kosiniak-Kamysz, who publicly announced his intention to attend while others chose not to participate. This divergence marked a clear split within the opposition during the event.
“I do not understand Poland’s behavior regarding the meeting in the Prime Minister’s Chancellery.”
The discussion also touched on Poland 2050. Sawicki offers insights that may not resonate with coalition partners. He describes a tight, emotionally charged environment within the group and notes that Poland 2050 deputies maintain ties with PO colleagues, while pressure from that side remains strong. He questions the logic of holding Sejm consultations a month earlier with PiS and PO, while later inviting PiS to discussions only to find that the opposition chose not to attend, concerned about potential political repercussions.
He mentions the Future+ initiative started by the Third Way, suggesting that this influenced the posture of Poland 2050 within the coalition. He emphasizes that the coalition is built on autonomy for each member, enabling a calm and effective campaign preparation beyond a single faction’s interests.
The PSL MP also addresses whether the varied positions within the PSL and Poland 2050 could create voter perceptions of coalition chaos. He counsels patience, noting that voters often interpret issues differently than politicians and journalists anticipate. The real test will come on election day.
There are related reflections on the Prime Minister’s Chancellery session, including the handling of a migration paper and the reactions of participants in subsequent discussions. Coverage also notes remarks attributed to Terlecki about absentees and larger geopolitical expectations tied to the future leadership of Germany.
This summary presents the perspectives circulating in political circles at the time of the meeting, reflecting ongoing debates about coalition dynamics, the use of media to shape narratives, and the strategic choices of opposition actors in Poland’s political landscape.