Frasyniuk:
Wladyslaw Frasyniuk fought for the ideals of a free, democratic Poland during his days of Solidarity protests in the 1980s. In 1982, he was sent to prison for four years for his opposition activities, but later was freed and participated in the Round Table discussions. Since the transition, Frasyniuk has managed to establish himself as a politician and has served as a member of the Freedom Union (UW) since 1994. A native of Wroclaw, he currently represents UW as a Sejm deputy. But much has changed since Frasyniuk started down the political road as a Solidarity member. One of the areas in which he feels the country has failed is in the dwindling number of women in politics. The other is the pervasiveness of corruption in business and politics. To further his cause of promoting women in politics, Frasyniuk is one of a group of UW members that previously supported a proposal to create quotas for women in Parliament. In late November, women from the leftist Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) party followed that idea by presenting their own plan to grant 30% of that party's leadership positions and 30% of election delegate spots to women. In hearkening back to his days as an anti-government activist in the 1980s, Frasyniuk claims that the success of male trade-union colleagues oftentimes was determined by the work of nameless women who fought alongside them. A legend in Solidarity circles, in 1981 he headed the Lower Silesian branch of the trade union. Outside politics, Frasyniuk is involved in business and is part owner of a transportation company. In addition, he is an avid boxer and committed fan of the sport. Frasyniuk recently spoke to the WBJ's Juliet D. Golden about barriers to increasing women's involvement in politics as well as the problem of corruption and how that reality differs from the ideals of the Solidarity period. The following is a translated and edited version of their conversation.
Q: Since you started our conversation talking about history, I would like to know if the ideals you fought for are still alive today, and whether they inform your work as a deputy.
A: Reality in Poland is changing all the time. We acted in a different reality. That was a different country, those were other surroundings and other conditions back then, under marshal law, the (main) asset was friendship. If a person had a feeling of friendship, feeling of sympathy, then (he) could function well in secret or conspiracy structures. People helped us even though they were in danger of being imprisoned. That was a different time. Today, I imagine that if one wanted to join the underground, you would have to have money. The main asset today is not human friendship, but money. Money rules. And I would like to say that that is a symptom of normality. But I also want to say that for me it's sad that friendship is becoming old-fashioned thinking. But that's how it is in a normal country. To get out of the economic, civilization and intellectual backwardness that Poland previously existed in required enormous dynamism, indifference and rapaciousness. In this new economy, only the strong ones survive. That is a radical difference and one that hurts.
Q: Why did the Freedom Union, and you specifically, decide to back a proposal to increase participation of women in politics?
A: During marshal law, women were very active. To be honest, thanks to women, we men were successful. When I think back to my closest colleagues, women dominated. They were of course at a level lower. They were conspirators, no one knew their names, but without them, we would not have been able to function. Women were the first to decide to hide us, not men. Men were afraid. When men knew what the consequences were, they were really afraid. I was in a similar situation once. I was moving from one place to another at the beginning of marshal law when there was the biggest danger and the highest degree of uncertainty as to what marshal law was about. I dropped by an apartment at 9 p.m., and the man fainted when he saw me, his son became hysterical from shame for his father and the only person who remained calm was the woman who had made the decision earlier, but hadn't prepared her husband. Seeing what happened, I was afraid that the man had had a heart attack. I ran out in a slight panic, wondering where I was supposed to hide. Generally, women did better because women have characteristics that men don't have. When women make decisions, they think things through, consider things more. They consider the risk and the consequences. They also consider if they can meet the expectations put before them. (A woman) considers if she can give her time and the time of her family so as not to let people down. On the other hand, if a woman says yes, that means yes.
Today, in this new situation when we are all incredibly busy, driven to survive and make money, are even greedy, to give our children a better start, women are particularly burdened. That's why we have a clear outflow of women from political life. Politics is so undefineable, unclear. Maybe women don't want to waste time on activities that don't have clear game rules. Year by year the number of women in politics decreases.
Q: How will the Freedom Union plan to increase the participation of women in politics?
A: We male politicians have to be forced to look around and not just at the electorate from the point of view of getting votes, but also with the goal of promoting women within organizations. In the proposal, politicians are forced to include a minimum of 30% of women on their election lists. That way every third person in the Sejm should be a woman. That of course requires that politicians inside their own organizations start to value women. It's not just about every third person being a woman, but about counting on women. It's about creating more opportunity and encouraging our female colleagues to be more active.
Q: This formula sounds very mathematical and a little artificial
A: I have come across this in many European countries. For example, once I was at a trade union conference, I think in France. I remember that there had to be 40% female representation at all levels. I had the impression that women were sought by force so that 40% of the (union's) management board were women. We are not going so far as to say that 30% of people on the (Freedom) Union's management board are women. But it's about forcing ourselves to take note of our female colleagues and start working with them and create those possibilities. It's not that women are worse. It's a case that women are more burdened in this transition period than men.
Q: Does your policy speak to women? Is it a way to get women to vote for the Freedom Union at the ballot box?
A: You don't put women on the election ballot so that women will vote for them. Women make rational decisions just like men. They vote for an effective politician or for a politician they like. Maybe he is not effective, but he is nice. More often, men look for women on the ballot. To get the male vote, it would be best if she were blond, fairly young and attractive. What she might have to say is insignificant. I think that women are needed on the Polish political scene for various reasons. Like I said before, they possess characteristics men don't. If you look at the unemployment statistics, especially the unemployed young with a higher education, women dominate. If you look at the labor market, women are in a worse situation. I don't know why women earn less then men. I meet in business circles. I have to say that rarely do women have success. I have the impression that women have to work two times harder to be successful and to be accepted in their surroundings. Men often prefer working with women. The president is a man and the woman is the vice president, but really, she's the person running the organization.
Q: On a different subject, the recent Transparency International report showed that Poland is becoming increasingly corrupt. How do you react to these findings?
A: I would say that that didn't elicit shock in me. First, we are a country that is in a transition period we are going from a communist system to a free market (one). Secondly, we are a poor country. A poor county in some ways is a demoralized society. Third, foreign capital is entering our market that uses the above elements I talked about, and they very often write off bribes as company costs. That's why we are additionally subject to the corruption process. Because large corporations or Western European companies more easily put out money if they can shorten (the bureaucratic process). That's a cost of entering the market. And the cost is lower than they would have to bear in their own market. I would say that this is a natural process for all poor countries. I would start out by saying that we should all repent. We are aware of our weaknesses.
Q: So for you, corruption is dictated by the presence of wealthy Western companies?
A: We are poor and a little demoralized from the communist system. On that basis, foreign investors use (payments) sometimes only to speed (things) up. If you (look) at a contract, this is not called a bribe. It's called a commission. No European company would call that a bribe, they would call it a provision.
Q: But isn't it alarming that the situation is getting worse at a time when Poland and Poles are becoming richer, not poorer? According to your assessment of the situation, corruption should become less common rather than more?
A: You could say that a poor person is a greedy person. Generally speaking, these are good conditions for corruption. One can also say that it's easier to live off commissions than (profit) from running a business. I say that as a person who runs a business. Poland doesn't have its own native capital. It's only now being created. Honestly, you can also say that we are excessively open and honest to foreign investors. We don't give privileges for Polish capital. Only now are we creating those privileges. Often people reach for money brought in from the outside.
Q: Should concrete steps be taken to prevent this, or will it disappear with time?
A: I often follow American laws. Americans often say that you have to get rid of corruption. From what I know of the American legal system, there are very strong restrictions. There aren't such hypocrisies whereby when doing business outside the (United States) you can give so-called commissions or bribes and write them off as costs. All European companies use these methods. If professions across the board opposed the practice of writing off the cost of bribes, the area of corruption would decrease. We also have to convince our citizens that there is no need to give an envelope when you go to the doctor, because the doctor and the hospital are paid for the cost of your treatment. But these are habits that we've had for years, that without the envelope our mothers are convinced that they will die because no one in the hospital will take care of them. That's not true. (Despite that) these habits sit deeply in our consciousness. This has to be changed.
Q: You are from Wroclaw and represent the city in Warsaw. The Supreme Administrative Court (NSA) this fall ruled that Wroclaw must pay back VAT on transactions, rejecting the city's argument that as a government body it should not have to pay the tax. Do you think that Wroclaw's refusal to pay the tax, or even calculate it, was political folly?
A: I think that perhaps it is a lack of experience, management experience dealing with finances. I am convinced that VAT for a city like Wroclaw would be a completely indifferent task. The majority of the VAT we would have to pay we could get back through write-offs from investments. For many business entities, which function and live off city institutions, the inability to write off VAT is a cost that those entities have to bear. I have the sense that here there is a lack of knowledge and certain lightheartedness (on the part of the city).
Q: Now Wroclaw owes about zl. 22 million ($5.2 million) in back VAT. Weren't city officials careless with public money?
A: That's not an explanation. In following the issue, I can't imagine that the president of my company would so carelessly handle tax-related issues. And that he would so irresponsibly comment on the issue in such a way that will obviously damage my company. All the comments I have come across made by local politicians are absurd and so damaging to the company called Wroclaw. That shows how much we need to invest in education legal and financial.
Q: Do you find it questionable that the city didn't keep VAT records even though it registered as a VAT payer in 1997?
A: I would put it this way: It's sad to me that the city board never passed a resolution (on the issue). That means the city never made a financial calculation (to determine) if VAT is a burden or if it's not. That's scary that decision makers who manage such a large city where there are millions of dollars of investments going on behaved so carelessly with taxes and finances.
Q: Should the mayor be held responsible for this?
A: I think the whole board is responsible.
Q: Which city board? The former board, or the present board?
A: I think all the boards. Based on the information I have, none of the boards ever (created a situation) where there was a vote on the matter. There was never any analysis carried out over the payment or non-payment of VAT in any of the board meetings. The present board doesn't know what the financial outcome will be for the next couple of years. That's like a situation whereby a company president doesn't know what is going on with the finances inside the company.
