Peasants at a crossroads

The last couple of weeks have brought two very significant developments in the debate over Polish accession to the European Union. First came the announcement that the European Commission had decided to press for reforms of the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP). The second was the visit to Poland by Guenther Verheugen, the commissioner responsible for enlargement. The EC's decision to press for the reform of the CAP is not surprising. The outdated and uneconomic nature of the subsidy system is acknowledged by all but its greatest beneficiaries. Franz Fischler, the commissioner responsible for agriculture, has proposed that the EU decouple direct payments from production. Money should be made available for producing more goods ecologically and for looking after the environment rather than being tied to production quotas. The proposal is controversial for the French and other Southern Europeans, but is welcomed by Poland because it holds out the hope of helping smaller ecological farmers, of which Poland has plenty. However, this would not be the first time the EU has considered reform only to step back from the brink when the protests start. The timing of the announcement suggests that the proposals are in part targeted at the Central Europeans in an attempt to make limited direct payments - starting at 25% of those available to Western counterparts - more palatable.

This brings us neatly to Verheugen's visit to Poland. The visit became significant not because of what he actually said. That was predictable enough. Far more important were the different reactions of the two coalition partners: the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) and the Peasants Party (PSL). The SLD seized with enthusiasm Verheugen's lines that "Poland does not consist of farmers only" and that "farmers are actually the only social group that will get cash up front for joining the EU" and repeated them in all interviews in the electronic media. The PSL preferred to maintain that the 25% proposal for direct payments in the first year of membership was unacceptable because it would make Polish agriculture uncompetitive on the single market. Both parties are still bound by the government's policy of challenging the EU's 25% proposal as unacceptable. Nevertheless, it is becoming increasingly clear that the SLD is preparing itself and the general public for a climb down. When the crunch comes in November or December, the SLD will decide that in order to join the EU, sacrifices have to be made. Before then, it may be able to extract a little more than the 25% currently on offer by waving Poland's rights to use other EU funds in return for higher direct payments.

The PSL will find it hard to accept such a line. Its rural electorate, tempted by Andrzej Lepper's populist Self-Defense party, may not allow it to be so pliant. Promises of "jam tomorrow," in the shape of getting full direct payments sooner than the 10 years currently on offer or the promised reform of the CAP, may not appease rural voters. This is why if this coalition is going to fall apart, it will happen in November or December this year. That will be the time when the negotiations will have to draw to a close and the government will have to accept or reject the final package on offer. It may just be that this will be a politically good moment for the PSL to leave the government. If it does do, unlike the Freedom Union (UW) in 2000, it will be doing so for an easily understandable reason.

If the PSL swallows its pride and stays, that will mean that it has chosen what is currently referred to as the Labor Union (UP) approach. The UP is a small left-wing party that decided to have an electoral coalition with the SLD in 2001 because it felt it had no chance of making it into Parliament on its own. That electoral coalition brought it seats in the Sejm and government jobs. However, it has also meant the demise of the party as an independent force. It is now a subsidiary of the SLD. A decision to stay in this government even if accession is perceived as a bad deal for Poland's farmers would be a conscious decision to follow that UP strategy. The resulting loss of voters and members would mean that the PSL would soon have to depend on an electoral coalition with the SLD. However, PSL members have always been very attached to their government posts. They may find those harder to give up than their independence. The PSL will, as always, want to have its cake and eat it too. It will maintain its protests about the EU's proposals. But it will stay in government "for the good of the country," hoping that something may turn up to save elected officials from the wrath of the rural voters.

Chris Mularczyk is a Warsaw-based consultant. He can be e-mailed at cmularczyk@wbj.pl