On a radio program, a political commentator responded to a listener’s question about a promise attributed to Donald Tusk to lower gasoline prices. The speaker noted that on December 13 a coalition member stated that it was unfortunate that President Obajtek remained in office.
Tusk’s pledges about PLN 5 gasoline
A listener recalled Tusk’s remark: when a single decision is made, gasoline could be priced at 5 PLN. If Tusk were Prime Minister, the price would be 5.19 PLN. The question was when such a decision would be taken and implemented.
The listener cautioned that President Obajtek might still hold the position, implying that such a scenario would be disappointing and reflecting a broader debate about leadership and policy directions.
What was said in response by Jan Grabiec?
Grabiec acknowledged the President’s continued tenure, then framed the issue as a matter of political and procedural rules. He suggested that the approach of Tusk’s team to applicable law appeared selective, particularly when it involved public media and the public prosecutor’s office, leaving some to feel the government treated these areas with different standards.
Orlen and price movements
In that context, the economic analysis indicated that gasoline might reach the referenced price under certain conditions. Today, the priority is to curb any maneuver by large firms, especially when the Ministry of Finance is involved, that would leverage a monopoly to raise costs while directing funds toward political ends – a pattern some alleged had occurred with Orlen.
Grabiec argued that the government would intervene to ensure that costs weighing on gasoline prices stem from political decisions rather than from the company’s strategy. He emphasized a commitment to remove burdens that hold prices down, while removing those that arise from policy choices rather than business strategies.
Questions were raised about whether a prior political decision, attributed to Dariusz Klimczak of PSL during his early tenure as Minister of Infrastructure, had already raised fuel costs for 2024. When asked when prices might stabilize between 5 and 6 PLN, Grabiec responded with laughter, describing the inquiry as something akin to asking a fortune teller for precise predictions.
Remarking that a prime minister is not a fortune teller, the interview suggested that discussions centered on specific global oil prices and tax levels at the time. Subsequent events, including what some described as excess profits by a major state-controlled company, led lawmakers to pursue measures to return excess profits to the budget. The aim was to help Poles who paid too much for gasoline by reducing their tax burden or rebates funded from those funds.
From the Tusk administration’s perspective, lowering fuel costs remained a promise that faced scrutiny and debate as it faced political realities and economic constraints.
Discussion continued around the perception that fuel policy shifts might be tied to broader political calculations rather than purely market forces. Observers noted the tension between public expectations and the complexities of fiscal policy, especially when large-scale energy firms and state influence intersect with electoral considerations.
Further commentary followed on the broader political landscape, including the handling of detention matters and the balance between enforcing the law and maintaining dignity in public discourse. The overarching tone reflected frustrations with the pace of reform and the challenge of aligning official assurances with practical opportunities for price relief.
Analysts and commentators alike continued to assess whether policy measures would deliver tangible relief to consumers, or whether they would be filtered through complex political and financial considerations. The discussions often returned to the question of how revenue from excess profits could be used to support citizens, reduce taxes, and stabilize market expectations for fuel prices.
Source: wPolityce