“The Euro-election campaign ended before the final results were announced, exactly with the end of the election silence. All that was needed in order to establish who to congratulate and who will remain 'marginalised in the political scene' (one of the media's favourite expressions), were the exit polls and a telephone survey. Besides that, there was little emotion – hardly surprising, since there was little to get emotional about. Everything becomes increasingly predictable, there is no question of diversity, since the system of financing political parties and the high election threshold block any new initiative, instead of supporting it.” This is how this year's Euro-parliamentary election was summed up by Krzysztof Tomasik on the website of Krytyka Polityczna. Little can be added.
Consistently with the pre-election polls, the election was won by the Citizens' Platform – PO (25 mandates; 44,43%); the second largest political force in Poland, the Law and Justice party – PiS – will also be represented in the EP (15 mandates; 27,4%), as well as the Democratic Left Alliance – the Labour Union (SLD-UP: 7 mandates; 12,34%) and the Polish People's Party – PSL (3 mandates; 7,01%). Other parties did not reach the 5% election threshold, which was consistent with the expectations.
The election campaign was largely based on pre-election polls, sometimes carried out day in – day out, by different research institutions, for different media. Who would win, or, to be exact, how much advantage would the PO gain over the PiS – those were the chief topics of this campaign. The media showed no interest in particular election postulates of individual parties – clashes between the PO and the PiS proved more important. Ultimately, voters had no idea about the programmes they were voting for. They voted “against” or “for” the PiS. As in the case of the last parliamentary election in 2007, this one, too, was dominated by the rhetoric of a “lost vote”. People did not want to vote for parties which, according to polls, would not reach the election threshold, and who had no chance of joining “the largest ones in Europe” (as the PO advertised the European People's Party, of which it is a member at the EP). They were afraid that their “lost” vote would reinforce “the radicals”, such as the PiS or the Libertas – yet another peculiarity of the European political scene. This tone dominated in all media reports concerning the EP election.
Immediately after the election, there was even some talk about “the hegemony in the Polish public sphere dominated by the PO-PiS”, about a two-party system, monopolization of the Polish political scene or about the scene being “cemented over”. Journalists, commentators and politicians from the parties which failed to reach the threshold indicated that access to funding for political activity constituted a barrier. Parliamentary parties obtain substantial financing from the state budget, and the parties outside the parliament are incapable of competing with them as far as election ads or air time are concerned. Possibly, one solution would be to change the act on financing political parties, as suggested by ex-President Aleksander Kwaśniewski one day after the election, in the “Tomasz Lis na żywo” television programme (TVP2, 8/6/2009). The same programme one week later was devoted to the issue of the two-party domination over the Polish political scene. “Should the Poles be happy about the domination of the four parties? Are the winning parties the ones with state funding, or the ones with good ideas? Do the parliamentary parties not share the desire to keep everybody else out of the game?” Those were the questions asked by Tomasz Lis. Similar questions were broadly asked on the internet after the election. Critical post-election opinions were expressed by bloggers: “Certain blockage of the system makes it impossible to end the 'farce of the IV Republic project' and move forward. The dominating political parties reflect the 'battles' fought years ago, and are incapable of offering anything new. They can still manipulate emotions of the public, but their actions seem increasingly distant from the problems of today's Poland. (…) More and more, people seem to get the impression, that what political parties have to offer is bizarre and secondary.”
Interestingly, large financial backing and excellent air time obtained thank to party control over the public television did not bring electoral success to the right-wing Libertas party; nevertheless, it tipped the balance during the campaign in Poland. Voters were threatened that the radicals might win again.
This year's EP campaign was considered boring and of little substance. Even taking into account the campaigns of the two “dealing” parties (the PO and the PiS), it is difficult to learn what the actual programme of those parties was, except for the lavishing of promises that thank to PO's joining and reinforcing the largest fraction in the European Parliament, a Pole – Jerzy Buzek – was going to become the new President of the EP, and, finally, Poland would assume a leading position within the EU. It is easier to quote campaign topics than the problems which were not discussed. The topics were two: Buzek and strong Poland; beyond that - nothing whatsoever. As Krzysztof Tomasik summed it up: “Choice becomes a pretence, since only four parties can squeeze beyond the threshold; those parties become increasingly similar to one another, which was particularly apparent with regard to their attitude towards the European Union. In fact, there was just one slogan, and all four parties could subscribe to it: 'Strong Poland in united Europe'.” Aleksandra Banot, a candidate from the list of Alliance for the Future – Centre Left (recommended by the Zieloni 2004 party), had a similar view, expressed on the Kreatura.net website: “The gender mainstreaming policy is still considered extreme. (…) Another fundamental point proves to be my understanding of Europe, and particularly – the relations between Europe and Poland. Everybody sees Poland in Europe, or in the European Union. Everybody repeats clichés about the role of Poland, strong Poland, Poland as strong as possible; we, the Poles (not Polish women though) are such an important nation, we are a great state, a superpower even, but, unfortunately, nobody respects us. (…) Nobody notices Europe. As if Europe was merely a transparent background, some abstract concept”. The focus was on the domestic strives, and during the campaign they were exactly as intensive, as any other time - nobody took notice of them any more.
The Union is a woman
Of the 50 Polish MEPs, only 11 are women (22%). Most of them – 9 – from the PO, and the remaining two – from SLD-UP. All of them occupied top positions on the lists, or were within the first three candidates. The PiS will be represented by men only, which is ironic, since their sole “pro-equality” accent was the party's re-vamping campaign – only women were shown on billboards and in TV ads as experts: Aleksandra Natalli-Świat, Joanna Kluzik-Rostkowska and Grażyna Gęsicka. The campaign was supposed to illustrate that the PiS provides women with better opportunities for a political career than any other party. Apparently not.
The present level of women's participation in the Polish representation to the EP (22%) does constitute a step forward in comparison to the 15% after the election of 2004. In this year's election, women were a minority on electoral lists (23,5%). In 13 constituencies, parties put up on average two women on top positions. Most women occupying the highest positions could be found on the lists of the PO, the Alliance for the Future, Samoobrona and SLD-UP, which had three no. 1 candidates each. Two women were top candidates for the PiS, and one for Libertas. The PSL had no women on top positions. Furthermore, in three constituencies the PdP had parity on their lists, and in most - women constituted 30-40% of candidates.
There was practically no mention of gender equality during the election campaign. The topic was not discussed in election programmes, ads, it was absent from the media. Apparently no one – neither the voters, nor, consequently, the politicians, nor the media (in interchangeable order) – was interested in equality. The only equality accent was the standing for post of a well-known Polish feminist, a Warsaw University professor Magdalena Środa, recommended by Zieloni 2004, from the first position on the PdP list in Łódź. Of all the parties, only the Greens discussed the issues of equal status of women and men immediately before the election (e.g. on the occasion of 8th of March, the International Women's Day, they issued a national newspaper entitled “Wiadomości Feministyczne” - the “Feminist News”, and announced their stance and their postulates concerning equality), as well as during the election, by organising debates on gender equality policies, the importance of the issue to the EU, the necessity to deal with urgent social issues, e.g. more childcare facilities. Towards the end of their campaign, Zieloni 2004 issued an appeal to candidates, to sign a commitment that they would act for equality of women and men in the EU, as well as nationally.
Campaigns aimed at increasing women's participation in politics, promoting parities and quotas were conducted during the EP election campaign by non-governmental organisations, such as the Polish Women's Lobby or the coalition of organisers of the Polish Women's Congress (among whom was Professor Magdalena Środa).
As a part of preparation for the Polish Women's Congress, in 17 Polish cities local “round tables”, debates and meetings were held during the EP campaign, concerning women's participation in politics and the necessity to introduce mechanisms increasing political representation of women – parities and quotas. The meetings were attended by, among others, Magdalena Środa, former First Lady Jolanta Kwaśniewska, Henryka Bochniarz (originators of the Congres), local authorities, female MEP candidates, present and former female MPs and senators (e.g. Krystyna Bochenek, Olga Krzyżanowska, Genowefa Grabowska) and representatives of women's non-governmental organisations and trade unions.
The Polish Women's Lobby undertook promotional and educational actions. Conferences and public debates were held (in Warsaw, Wrocław, Kraków, Bydgoszcz) including those with participation from MEP candidates: Danuta Hübner, Lidia Geringer de Oedenberg, Joanna Senyszyn and Róża Thun, as well as Margot Wallström, Vice-President of the European Commission, who is responsible for institutional relations and communication strategy. After one of the conferences, PWL issued a resolution encouraging people to vote for women: “We appeal to all Women and Men in Poland – the time has come to take concrete action: let us encourage women to stand for the election and let us support them in their campaign, let us vote for candidates who can introduce new political quality in the field equality, let us not voluntarily abdicate our rights by not voting, let us monitor fulfilment of electoral promises. Sustainable development of Europe is not possible without modernisation of political systems, based on including men and women, equally, into the decision-making areas.”
Poland is still dominated by “men's politics”. Social issues and equality demands are pushed aside by the subjects dominating the political debate: Euro 2012, settling of historical accounts, lustration, investigative commissions, the economic crisis. Even the heated debate about regulating the IVF treatment was silenced for the time of the campaign. Unlike in the case of previous elections, the issue of homosexuality was absent from the campaign, except for a few accents (it used to be used as the customary “threat” by right-wing parties). The rights of homosexuals were defended by Zieloni 2004 – the party's candidate, Krystian Legierski from the PdP list, sued, using election procedures, three MEP candidates from the Republic Right Party, who, during one of election meetings in Kartuzy, stated that “homosexuality is a genetically transmitted illness, which ought to be treated”. In his suit, Legierski claimed that this false statement infringed upon his personality rights as a homosexual, and it undermined the public's confidence in him as an MEP candidate. It also undermined confidence in the Zieloni 2004 which he represented, and which had in its programme postulates relating to the right of homosexuals to live in accordance with their orientation. The court dismissed the case, claiming that Legierski did not prove that homosexuality was not a genetic disorder. The media followed the case, but without any further consequences.
Strong Poland in Europe?
35% of seats in the European Parliament will belong to women. It is a better result than in the last election (31%), but not sufficient. Most women were introduced, obviously, by the Scandinavian countries; Sweden and Finland have even more female Euro MPs than male ones (respectively 56% and 62%). Estonia's election result is considered a historic one: 50% of women and 50% of men. Also Holland (48%), Denmark (46%), France (44%) and Bulgaria (47%!) were close to perfection. Poland's result is one of the lowest ones: the shameful leadership belongs to Malta (0% of women), than there is the Czech Republic (18%), followed closely by Poland and its 22%.
Women are not considered as candidates for top posts – the President of the EP, the head of the Council of Europe or the EU Commissionaires. Last term's Polish Commissionaire, who this time stood from the PO's list, Danuta Hübner, after explicit suggestions from the Prime Minister, “finally decided she would become a Euro MP” - as the media delicately put it.
Lobbying for increased women's presence in the EU's decision-making posts is conducted by the European Women's Lobby (EWL), which, during the election, run a campaign for parities: “50/50 Campaign for Democracy”. EWL questions prime ministers and party leaders, including the leaders of the EP parties, how they intend to ensure gender equality while appointing people for decision-making posts. “It is difficult to accept that in the 21st century, in case of nominations for top posts, all criteria are taken into account, such as nationality, size of a country, and political views, while the sex criterion is being ignored!”, said Myria Vassiliadou, Secretary General of the EWL.
Will the new female Euro MPs from Poland support this idea? Among those who won a mandate there are some, who are not afraid to talk about parities, but they did not fight for them within their own political parties. Several of them are new to their parties - e.g. the three top PO women: Danuta Hübner, Róża Thun and professor Lena Kolarska-Bobińska. We know from conferences that they support parities, are interested in women's issues, but we cannot predict whether they will choose to deal with those issues within the EP. The issues of equality are likely to interest Joanna Senyszyn, elected from the SLD-UP list, who has for long declared her feminist views. Her female party colleague, Lidia Geringer de Oedenberg, an MEP for the previous and the current term, is also sympathetic to pro-women initiatives (e.g. she supported the Feminoteka Foundation's open letter to the European Commission, concerning Poland's failure to abide by the EU equality directives). Hence, Polish women cannot be sure whether they will be able to rely on any of their MEPs about important women's issues.
Most of the Polish female MEP's will join, in accordance with their party line, the Christian Democrats - the EPP, while the two SLD-UP MEP's will traditionally join the Socialists (PES).
The largest parties did not win everywhere
The western media announced that Europe chose “the turn to the right”. After the election, the largest Christian Democrats (the EPP) became stronger, while the Socialists weakened. In many countries the far-right parties and Euro-Sceptics grew, e.g. in Holland, Denmark, Austria and Hungary. Twelve far-right and nationalist parties from twelve countries sent to Strasbourg as many as 36 MEP's. The media speculate that the voters do not want a multi-cultural European Union, that they proved to be sceptical about the European Parliament's policies, that nationalist attitudes are on the rise due to the economic crisis, and that the EU does not react promptly enough. Some even go as far, as to predict the disintegration of the European community.
Sociologist Adam Ostolski (a member of “Krytyka Polityczna” and Zieloni 2004) was more optimistic in his assessment of the situation: “The European election does not signify the Christian Democrats' victory. One can consider it a relative success, albeit not based on solid premisses. The European Peoples' Party constitutes the largest club in the new parliament simply because it lost less than the Socialists. (…) The only really victorious powers are the xenophobic Right and the Greens – the groups proposing ostensible or authentic alternatives to the status quo. Actually, it is worth observing the lack of increase in support for the radical Left (though in Ireland one mandate was won by a Trockist politician Joe Higgins), as well as the mandate won by the Swedish Pirate Party”. And although Ostolski realises that strong Christian Democrats and Conservatives mean no chance for quick change, worsening of the situation or preserving the status quo in the areas of consumer rights, workers' rights, rights of women and minorities, protection of the natural environment, he also indicates the new bright spots of the last election: “Another important question is the European success of the Greens. Particularly in France, where they formed a broad coalition spreading from an alter-globalist José Bové, to a centrist environmentalist Antoine Waechter. This brought them as many as 14 mandates, and the position of the third political power in the country. For the European voters, the idea of the New Green Order as an answer to the crisis proved more attractive than the anti-capitalist language of the radical Left. This is important, since in the European Parliament the Greens vote similarly to the Communists about most important issues. The difference is mainly in the language and the political style. Even in a crisis situation, the tone of objection, resistance and rebellion proved less persuasive than the tone of (however modest) hope.”
For Polish women hopes were raised by the Polish Women's Congress, organised by private people, companies, non-governmental organisations. 4 thousand of its participants from all over the country unanimously supported its main demands: parities on election lists, equal pay for women and men, serious treatment of the issue of gender equality, e.g. by way of appointing an independent ombud for equal status of women and men. The Congress cannot be underestimated. It gave women hope for change.
If we manage to change something in Poland, we should manage to do the same in Europe. Introducing parities during the next European Parliament elections will definitely yield a better result than the present one.
Translated by Katarzyna Nowakowska
Anna Czerwińska – graduate of philosophy and gender studies at the University of Warsaw, Vice-President of the Feminoteka Foundation, originator and coordinator of the Virtual Museum of the History of Women.