In a candid discussion on Radio TOK FM, Dominika Wielowieyska pressed Deputy Minister of State Assets Robert Kropiwnicki about the practice of filling state-owned company supervisory boards with party activists. The journalist challenged the rallying cry from the government to replace current managers, asking bluntly, “Who should be appointed?”
From the outset of the new administration, a rapid reshaping of leadership in key state enterprises has been evident. The sacking of the CEOs at Orlen and Enea underscored a broader political resolve to overhaul governance. Supporters of the change insist that replacing leaders aligns with a broader campaign pledge to refresh management with capable professionals rather than political allies. Wielowieyska urged a closer look at who actually gets these seats, noting that those appointed by the governing coalition’s parties often come from political circles, not solely from industry shelves of expertise.
“I don’t agree with having party activists in those roles,” she remarked, but added that many of the new appointees boast substantial professional backgrounds across law, economics, and sector-specific fields.
Kropiwnicki, responding, emphasized that the administration’s work at the Ministry of Finance underlines a push for strong professional governance across state-controlled entities. The goal, he said, is to ensure the supervision of these companies is robust and independent, with professionals leading the boards.
Platform members have cited the need for accountability and merit in appointments, arguing that the boards should be staffed by individuals who meet strict professional standards.
Platform nepotism
One cited example is Magdalena Roguska, a Warsaw councilor and a high‑ranking figure within the ruling party’s structures, who was placed on the supervisory board of the State Security Printing Company. Roguska also serves as treasurer of the capital’s PO and leads the political cabinet of a senior Interior Ministry official. Critics point to this as evidence of political influence in board selections because the minister responsible for the portfolio has direct oversight over the company. The question remains: who should be appointed if not civil servants trusted by the minister?
Kropiwnicki responded that ministerial oversight often relies on officials who act as a direct arm of the minister within supervisory boards, and that such arrangements are intended to ensure alignment with policy goals.
Wielowieyska did not stop at a single instance, noting potential expansions of this pattern to other firms such as Enea, where candidates linked to various political currents have surfaced, including figures associated with alternative political platforms and foundations connected to prominent public figures. The deputy head of the Ministry of State Assets confirmed that fair contests would be held for leadership roles across state-owned enterprises, including Orlen, with clear criteria that prioritize experience and proven capability.
The ongoing discussion highlights a tension between professional qualifications and political legitimacy. Critics argue that the line between merit and party affiliation is often blurred, while supporters maintain that a strong, politically coherent leadership is necessary to drive strategic reforms across the state sector. The debate remains central to the question of how best to safeguard the interests of taxpayers while pursuing an ambitious program of modernization and accountability.
There are recurring analyses drawing connections between personnel changes and broader fiscal and economic considerations. Observers warn that sweeping personnel shifts could have repercussions for the confidence of markets and the stability of state finances, even as they acknowledge that decisive leadership can be essential for implementing reforms. The conversation continues to unfold as new appointments are announced and governance practices are evaluated against defined performance benchmarks.
It is worth noting that discussions about professional standards in board appointments are part of a wide-ranging assessment of how state assets are managed and overseen. The emphasis remains on ensuring that leadership in these companies is guided by accountability, expertise, and a forward-looking approach to industry challenges. The conversation, though heated at times, reflects a broader societal interest in how public enterprises are governed and how public trust is maintained in the face of political transitions.
READ ALSO:
— Tusk’s broom. A blow to state finances. “This dangerous game could have serious consequences for the entire economy.”
-No surprises! Banaś is happy with Obajtek’s departure. He announces more inspections at PKN Orlen and notifications about the purchase of masks
— The Supreme Court report attacks Orlen. Sasin: “Gifts” from the politically committed President Banaś for the new government to attack his predecessors
Mon/TOK FM
Source: wPolityce