The idea of drawing up two opposition lists for the upcoming parliamentary elections, a concept repeatedly advocated by PSL leader Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz, received support from MP Marek Sawicki (PSL). He argued that having a single opposition list could be useful for PiS.
During a question-and-answer session with PAP, Sawicki explained his view on how the opposition might structure its contingents for the elections and whether there would be one or multiple lists.
Two lists instead of one
Kosiniak-Kamysz has remained steadfast in his stance, repeatedly voicing support for two opposition lists. He envisions a centre-right bloc that would include PSL and possibly Polska 2050, paired with a liberal-left list comprising Civic Platform and the Left, according to Sawicki.
Whether this plan materializes remains uncertain, and time will reveal how the strategy unfolds, the MP noted.
When asked whether he shared the PSL president’s view, Sawicki answered, “Of course, yes.”
He added that the two-list approach is something he endorses. On the other hand, he acknowledged that the idea of a single, broad opposition list is something PiS would likely pursue because it would enable a campaign organized around the leadership of Donald Tusk and a direct confrontation with him.
Reflecting on last year, Sawicki recalled that Kosiniak-Kamysz had stressed the opposition should unite on substantive issues, yet he warned that entering the elections together would be ineffective from a strategic standpoint.
Kosiniak-Kamysz cited an analysis by Professor Jarosław Flis, arguing that a single bloc does not guarantee victory or governance, and that the prospect of governance could be diminished by a broad coalition. He expressed genuine enthusiasm for two blocs and said he was doing everything possible to advance that goal. He noted that the PO had already set its electoral strategy and that their paths should not cross to form a joint list.
Sawicki was also asked by PAP whether the PKW’s rejection of the Polska 2050 party’s 2021 report affected talks about a joint list of farmers with politicians from that party. By the end of last year, Kosiniak-Kamysz had been involved in discussions about forming a broader alliance with 2050.
“We are ready to talk to Poland 2050 and we are having such talks. We are also in discussions with Agrounia, and we will see what results arise from these talks. I wouldn’t expect results this year, but in the spring of next year these decisions will be made on a broadly democratic basis,” the PSL leader stated.
Troubles of Holownia
Sawicki argued that PKW’s rejection of the Poland 2050 report has no bearing on discussions between the PSL and its allied politicians about a joint election list. He criticized PKW for what he called a mistake that could have been checked even at the party’s registration stage. If there were any investigations to be pursued, he said, they should target associations rather than a political party, since a party itself cannot conduct financial transactions without proper registration.
In December last year, Rzeczpospolita reported that PKW rejected Polska 2050’s 2021 report. The party had registered in March 2021 but listed zero activity for the year, including funds donated and non-monetary contributions. The paper explained that the party’s difficulties with the 2021 report were linked to the 2021 party congress and a high-profile guest, Jaśmina, and PKW’s assessment that the party benefited from associations and institutes in ways that violated rules, leading to the report’s rejection.
Szymon Hołownia, questioned on Radio ZET about the PKW decision, asserted that his party had not engaged in political activities that would merit the challenge, and said an appeal to the Supreme Court was in preparation. He noted that the party had been active within a civil movement. “I am the president of the association, a citizen of Poland, with the right to voice political opinions and to propose ideas. The party did not function as it should have,” Hołownia emphasized.
He added that the party’s registration had taken a year and a half, and three months elapsed between the final decision and its publication online.
gah/PAP
Source: wPolityce