Former Polish Prime Minister Kazimierz Marcinkiewicz (who was recently replaced in the prime minister's seat by the twin brother of the current Polish president, Jarosław Kaczyński) shared the optimistic mood of his fellow citizens: assessing the country's stay in the European Union, he noted that during this time Poland had received €2.7 billion from the European Union. According to the ex-premier, this had a positive effect on the country's macroeconomic situation, allowed it to increase exports and attract significant investments: over two years, the total volume of investments in Poland (both direct and portfolio) amounted to about $46 billion.
Nevertheless, relations between Poland and the EU have been marred by a series of serious conflicts. One of the most significant broke out during the negotiation process over the EU budget for 2007-2013 and the amount of funds allocated through the so-called EU structural funds. (The structural funds, created to overcome existing disparities between EU countries, are the main instrument through which the restructuring of the Polish economy is financed.) Despite lengthy negotiations and very serious bargaining, Poland will not receive the initially promised €61 billion. Largely due to the tough stance of the United Kingdom, the amount of payments was reduced by €2 billion. And this can be considered a good result, because the British wanted to cut payments even more.
The matter ended in a diplomatic scandal when an email from the British ambassador in Warsaw, Charles Crawford, was leaked to the press. In it, annoyed by the stubbornness of Poland and some other new EU members at the negotiations, he caustically mocked the political establishment of these countries. In his letter, the ambassador suggested that Tony Blair gather representatives of 'new Europe,' present the British offer-ultimatum one last time, give them an hour to think, and place a 'large, cheap, and reliable Chinese alarm clock' on the table in front of them. After that, if no agreement was reached, keep all the money for themselves. Crawford also expressed his willingness to donate his own alarm clock if necessary.
However, Poland's problems in the EU are by no means limited to the division of structural funds. Paradoxically, the country is experiencing great difficulties in absorbing the European funds already allocated. The figures speak for themselves: for 2004-2006, the EU allocated nearly €13 billion to Poland, while by the end of last year, only €370 million, or just 4.3% of the total, had been transferred to recipients' accounts.
The issue is that the Polish government has so far been unable to create conditions conducive to the absorption of already allocated funds. The main reason cited is the non-compliance of Polish legislation with the strict requirements imposed on the mechanism for using EU funds. And the EU structural funds are designed to finance specific projects with co-financing from the project initiator.
The inability of Polish state authorities to quickly create a system of administrative support for the implementation of EU-funded projects could lead to the country simply being unable to use significant financial resources. For example, the amount of European funds requested for the development of Poland's transport infrastructure by the end of last year was only 0.2%, and this despite the far from perfect condition of most Polish highways.
In addition to Poland's desire to increase funding through structural funds, the issue of quotas on agricultural products caused serious disagreements in the EU. A deputy from the main party in the ruling coalition, Law and Justice, Paweł Zalewski, assessed the distribution of these quotas as 'a huge defeat for Poland.'
Let us recall that according to the accession treaty to the EU, Poland undertook to limit agricultural production to certain limits. As is now becoming clear, for a number of items these limits turned out to be clearly underestimated for Poland. Such a situation arose, for example, with regard to milk. Representatives of the Polish Ministry of Agriculture called the milk quotas 'insufficient' and tried to increase them (such an opportunity is provided for in the accession treaty). However, to no avail...
A similar story happened with Polish starch. Paradoxically, Poland, one of Europe's largest potato producers, was forced to import starch due to restrictions imposed by EU quotas. All attempts to increase the quota, as with milk, led nowhere. A decision was called 'a victory for Polish deputies in the European Parliament' under which Poland could use the remaining quotas of other countries only if those countries did not fully utilize them.
But perhaps the most serious problem for Poland, which the country has not yet been able to solve even after joining the European Union, remains unemployment. Despite a slight decrease in recent months, it still remains at a record high for the EU level – 16.5%. However, this is the average figure for the country. If we look at the unemployment rate in individual regions, the situation looks even more depressing. For example, in Bartoszyce and Braniewo, bordering the Kaliningrad region, unemployment reaches astronomical 37% and 38% respectively. A similar situation exists in a number of other regions of Poland. It is obvious that the observed economic growth (Polish GDP grew by 3.4% last year) does not yet lead to an increase in employment.
The deplorable situation on the labor market is forcing Poles, mainly young people, to leave their homeland in search of earnings. Migration to the 'old' EU countries, which are gradually opening their labor markets to new EU members, has become a mass phenomenon. According to some data, about 2 million able-bodied citizens have left Poland in the last two years. At the same time, it seems that the Polish authorities are deliberately banking on migration as one of the main means of solving the unemployment problem. In a recent government report on the state and prospects of the labor market in Poland, the authors speak with great enthusiasm about new opportunities for Poles to find employment in other EU countries and predict a possible increase in the number of people leaving for the West. Central Polish publications are filled with emotional stories about the happy fate of those who left to work abroad.
Here we can recall another excerpt from the e-mail of the British ambassador in Warsaw quoted above. In it, he reproached Poland for the fact that Her Majesty's government managed to create more jobs for Poles in the UK than the Polish government did in its own country. It is hard to disagree with this.
It is also hard to disagree with the words of former Prime Minister Marcinkiewicz: in his opinion, joining the EU for Poland is still an opportunity that has not been fully used. Whether Warsaw will be able to use it better in the future than in the past two years depends entirely on the ability of the ruling elite to carry out the necessary administrative reforms and solve the unemployment problem.
Aleksei Timofeev.
IA Rosbalt