You are here

Poland’s successful losers

Nov 08,2015 - Last updated at Nov 08,2015

How can a government with the best economic record in Europe (indeed in the entire OECD) be humiliated at the polls by a Eurosceptic, nationalistic and economically illiterate opposition — one deemed unelectable only a year ago?

That is the question many Poles, and friends of Poland, are now asking, following the defeat on October 25 of the Civic Platform government.

If creating jobs and boosting incomes cannot get you re-elected, what can?

One reason for the opposition’s victory is, of course, universal: after a time, people everywhere want change, and Civic Platform had been in power since 2007.

And impatience with the status quo is arguably stronger in the post-communist countries of Central and Eastern Europe, where much of the social, political and economic order is yet to be generally accepted.

Indeed, Civic Platform’s Donald Tusk was Poland’s first post-communist prime minister to win successive terms.

Moreover, as parties govern longer, their strongest personalities tend to be replaced by weaker ones.

Civic Platform contested this election after replacing Tusk with Ewa Kopacz, and has had the same problem with a number of other “substitutions”.

What is specific to Poland is that the past eight years have apparently created a pronounced case of cognitive dissonance.

Annual GDP growth averaged 3.2 per cent over this period; and, unlike in the rich West, both inequality and unemployment have actually fallen, with growth mainly benefiting the middle three quintiles of the income distribution.

This segment of the population — usually politically crucial — enjoyed a 28 per cent rise in per capita real income from 2007 to 2014.

At one level, Poles are aware of this, with large majorities describing financial conditions in their own families, workplaces, and social environments as either “good” or “very good”.

The dissonance is that equally large majorities also describe Poland’s economic situation and the “direction in which the country is moving” as either “bad” or “very bad”.

Poland’s transformation is visible not only in the form of new motorways, local roads, airports, hospitals and stadiums, but also in the appearance of vast numbers of new and refurbished housing units, supermarkets and modern factories.

And this has not been achieved by mortgaging the future. Poland has recorded the fourth lowest increase in public debt (as a percentage of GDP) in the European Union.

And yet the disconnect between this reality and the Poland “in ruins” or “on the verge of catastrophe” perceived by many voters was too strong to ignore.

Even Kopacz admitted the contrast between the “public affluence” that everyone sees and the “private penury” that many feel persists (at least relative to Germany, the preferred benchmark for Poles).

In today’s Poland, it is harder to accept wages — nominally about a third of those in Germany — that had seemed perfectly adequate in 2007, when they were only a quarter of the German level.

But unsurprisingly, Kopacz’s campaign slogan, “A strong economy — higher wages” and her implicit promise to address the issue in one parliamentary term, did not appear credible.

Although the problem faced by Kopacz and Civic Platform was specifically Polish, it contains a universal truth: to win, politicians must define the context in which they operate

During Tusk’s premiership, the government was perversely reluctant to claim credit for Poland’s economic success.

Tusk praised Poles themselves for their hard work, but neglected to emphasise that without the government’s effective macroeconomic policies, that work would have been wasted.

He never even reminded voters that the government’s choices in managing the fallout from the 2008 global financial crisis — which were neither obvious nor easy, because they required rejecting the EU’s austerity consensus — was the right one.

Given that most voters do not consider themselves able to judge competence in government, they base their choice of party on the general direction in which it intends to take the country and the overarching principles by which it intends to govern.

Civic Platform came to power in 2007 with a strongly pro-business and free-market ethos. 

During the financial crisis, it had to moderate these views considerably, taking steps that ran counter to its ideology: increasing deficits in the trough of the crisis (2009-2010) and raising taxes once growth resumed (2011).

And then, when the government reduced the size of the absurdly expensive, but popular, funded pension system (2011-2014), Tusk attempted to compensate voters by pumping all additional free resources into family benefits.

Although this was justified, given Poland’s very low birth rate, it was also intended to appeal to his urban electorate.

But to many voters, it seemed that Civic Platform, which had identified itself in 2007 as socially conservative and economically liberal, was drifting to the economic (as well as the cultural) left.

By 2014, the government was perceived as being so pragmatic as to be almost value free.

That perception naturally raised the suspicion that self-interest had become Civic Platform’s main motivation. 

As the party’s narrative became an endless litany of the good social things it had done (or was about to do), Poles came to view the campaign as a cynical attempt to buy their votes — and to do so with their own money.

Even the fact that these promises, though plentiful, were mostly inexpensive (certainly compared to those of the opposition) was not used to convey a commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Elections are a choice, not an auction between competing lists of promises, with victory simply going to the highest bidder.

Civic Platform lost because it failed to explain to Poles its own view of that choice.

It hardly mattered that the opposition’s programme lacked credibility: Civic Platform had already become the architect of its own defeat.

 

The writer was Poland’s minister of finance and deputy prime minister from 2007 to 2013. ©Project Syndicate, 2015.
www.project-syndicate.org

up
140 users have voted.

Comments

Mr Rostowski - I read your article and I wonder where were you on April 10, 2010? How you answer that single question will perhaps answer all your other questions. I would like to follow it up with another question: What were you thinking on that fateful day and in the days following? Again, how you answer that question might illuminate all your queries on Poland and all things Polish. All other questions - such as how the Civic Platform performed on the economy are really footnotes. I don't really need a response from you because... in your opening paragraph you state "nationalistic and economically illiterate opposition" to describe the winners. That alone tells me much about your way of thinking. But I gave your article a chance - I read it all the way through - and the obvious - the screaming obvious was missing from it. So, Mr. Rostowski, where were you on April 10, 2010 and what were you thinking about in the moments immediately following? No need to answer me. Answer yourself - to yourself. Just be honest, just be brutally honest and then you will know.

The present biggest problem of Poland is not to get rid of coal but get rid of corruption rooted deeply in Communist era. Just now the Communism in Poland at once supposed to be going out! There is the main feeling of most Poles in the time when a new government is going to be formed in a few days. The main reasons for the PiS (Law & Justice Party) winning the last elections, both presidential and parliamentary are overwhelming corruption scandals in last 70 or at least 25 years period. First it was the disastrous WWII, then came Communists on their tanks, backed among the others by lavish Roosevelt aid programmes, then so-called post-Communists (children and grandchildren of the previous ones), colored mostly as the ‘Liberals’ and ‘pro-Western’ guys, took the power. And now the nowadays Communism disguised in the human rights clothes seems to be over, probably — there is the Poles’ dream! – forever, and ever! Young Poles in Poland are in almost 50% unemployed, the rest of them working on part-time short-time contracts for wages comparable to that of the first part of 19th Century. What is more important the demographic catastrophe is coming to Poland very soon. Three millions Poles, mostly young, the most productive emigrated during Donald Tusk’s infamous – in their opinion — pro-German and pro-Russia comprador-style governance. So the West has to understand Poland’s electoral choice. For Poland’s brave people no matter Putin, Merkel, Hollande and even cohorts of the experts from Another Planet! And their fantastic opinions and advices. Over is over, dear banksters and pro-Putin totalitarians. Howgh!

The present biggest problem of Poland is not to get rid of coal but get rid of corruption rooted deeply in Communist era. Just now the Communism in Poland at once supposed to be going out! There is the main feeling of most Poles in the time when a new government is going to be formed in a few days. The main reasons for the PiS (Law & Justice Party) winning the last elections, both presidential and parliamentary are overwhelming corruption scandals in last 70 or at least 25 years period. First it was the disastrous WWII, then came Communists on their tanks, backed among the others by lavish Roosevelt aid programmes, then so-called post-Communists (children and grandchildren of the previous ones), colored mostly as the ‘Liberals’ and ‘pro-Western’ guys, took the power. And now the nowadays Communism disguised in the human rights clothes seems to be over, probably — there is the Poles’ dream! – forever, and ever! Young Poles in Poland are in almost 50% unemployed, the rest of them working on part-time short-time contracts for wages comparable to that of the first part of 19th Century. What is more important the demographic catastrophe is coming to Poland very soon. Three millions Poles, mostly young, the most productive emigrated during Donald Tusk’s infamous – in their opinion — pro-German and pro-Russia comprador-style governance. So the West has to understand Poland’s electoral choice. For Poland’s brave people no matter Putin, Merkel, Hollande and even cohorts of the experts from Another Planet! And their fantastic opinions and advices. Over is over, dear banksters and pro-Putin totalitarians. Howgh!

This has to be one of the most biased articles i have read in a looong long time, Civic Platform lost because they sold Poland out to German companies who don't pay any Tax AT ALL, while at the same time polish companies are being taxed to death within the first 3 years of them starting, polish state & private companies are being sold to western companies at a fraction of a cost, only to be liquidated within a couple years to thin out competition.

Wages for ordinary people have not changed much in over a decade (around 30-40% increase) whereas the cost of living has tripled in that same time span, not to mention no government support to families, disabled & homeless etc. The only people to benefit from the exemplary economic record of Poland are the very banksters and bureaucrats who have forsaken the polish people.

Also looking over the border to germany where Angela Merkel has invitied economic migrants to the EU on a tasty 2000 euro per month welfare package, many poles are getting angry that our own citizens are forgotten.

Civic platform is the very flag of german dominance and polish traitors.... now with the Law & Justice government we will get LAW & JUSTICE !

Add new comment

CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 9 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.

Newsletter

Get top stories and blog posts emailed to you each day.