The election result is a warning sign. We need to change the way we think about the climate [KOMENTARZ]

In the Polish campaign for the European Parliament, the parties of the ruling coalition broadly supported climate policy, with some changes (although they mostly did not talk about it). In turn, the right-wing, populist opposition from PiS and Confederation went to Brussels to “stop the Green Deal”. What does the election result in Poland tell us about the future of climate policy in Poland?

Years later, the Civic Coalition overtook PiS in second place, one of whose demands was to stop the EU’s climate policy (although until recently, as the ruling party, PiS co-created this climate policy). The Confederation, for which “stopping the Green Deal” is one of its main demands, was in third place. The Left and Third Way, which support climate policy – but with amendments – achieved a poor result.

There is no mass opposition to the Green Deal

We will learn more by checking how mobilized the electorates of individual parties were – or were not. Both KO and PiS attracted significantly fewer people in these elections – the parties had 4.3 and 4.2 million votes compared to 6.6 and 7.6 million, respectively, in October. Even more powerful was the demobilization of smaller parties in the ruling coalition. In turn, 1.4 million people voted for the Confederation – only slightly less than in the elections to the Sejm and Senate (1.5 million).

The election campaign was clearly dominated by domestic affairs, not climate policy. Polls show that for populist right-wing voters in Poland it was a moderately important factor – well below the economy and the issue of the EU’s influence on our country in general.

With such results, it is difficult to conclude that we are dealing with a broad rejection of climate policy. The parties that openly opposed it are strong, but not dominant – and yet their voters had many other reasons for voting. Despite farmers’ protests, including Solidarity demonstrations with a large presence of right-wing politicians, voters did not come out en masse to “block the Green Deal”. In the countryside the turnout was even lower than in the cities.

On the other hand, Confederation, like no other party, managed to motivate its voters to go to vote and not stay at home. If not the climate policy itself, general dissatisfaction with the EU’s actions (or their image among these voters) was certainly a significant factor here.

This result is not a red card for climate policy – especially since subsequent polls show that the majority in Poland and throughout Europe cares about the climate and wants action. But it can be treated as a warning signal: If the majority supporting the Green Deal does not draw conclusions and implement this policy better, opposition will only grow and drive voters into the arms of those who say “Get the Green Deal in the trash!” Both the European Union institutions themselves and the national authorities (they not only co-create, but also translate directives from Brussels into reality) must learn to communicate and talk better – talking is also listening! – about climate policy.

Such a changed policy must be made with people in mind. Citizens support the development of renewable energy, they see that it will help reduce electricity bills, they want more greenery and good public transport. Climate policy must combine – and show how it combines – cutting pollution with visible benefits to quality of life. This idea is not new, but we need to move from concept to implementation. The work is not only on the side of politicians, but also on the media, which must explain well how, why and why climate policy is implemented.

New parliament, same planet

Some politicians may want to slow down the green transformation, but climate change will not slow down – on the contrary, in the coming years we will see an acceleration of the effects of climate destabilization.

We must also remember this – and the potential consequences. As further extreme weather events cause destruction and death; as we suffer in heatwaves; when drought fuels price increases, and weather destabilization in the Global South accelerates migration – the climate may become “fodder” for the far right in a completely new way. If parties closer to the center – on the right and better – seriously want to stop populists and convince voters that they are not worth voting for, they cannot withdraw from the fight for a safe climate.