Jacek and Michał Karnowski interview Prof. Waldemar Paruch, head of the Government Centre for Strategic Analyses.

According to 60% of participants of the post-election poll carried out by the portal wPolityce.pl, the success of Law and Justice is moderate and gives reasons to be happy, but should also make one think. In the opinion of 15%, the result is a great success, while it was a failure in the view of one in four. It is worth mentioning that in the course of time these assessments have clearly improved. Is the intuition of our readers correct?

Waldemar Paruch: The facts are most important and today they really look differently from what the main television broadcasted during the election evening. The numbers are indisputable. 34.13% of votes on Law and Justice in regional assemblies elections is a success, which so far has not been achieved by any other party. Solidarity Electoral Action (AWS) won about 33% in 1998, still less.

READ MORE: The post-election landscape in Poland

Civic Platform at the height of its power had about 30 percent.

Indeed. The second number: Law and Justice gained 2 million voters who wanted to vote for this party in local government elections. The third number: turnout increased by almost 7 percent, so there were 2 million new voters who substantially supported Jarosław Kaczyński’s party. Taking it further: in 2014, there were 2.5 million invalid votes, and now several hundred thousand, so the new voters joined in. It is also an indirect proof that the authorities elected at that time did not reflect the will of the voters.

Law and Justice won in nine provinces. The political goal assumed the first eight places, so it has been achieved. We also know that Law and Justice has a majority in the assemblies of six voivodships, and in the next few, the talks are underway. This also means exceeding the assumed goal.

Law and Justice won and Polish Peasants’ Party (PSL) lost?

Yes, Polish Peasants’ Party is the biggest loser. It is a party which did not win 23% of votes, as it had happened four years ago; it did not win 16%, which we heard about during the election evening, but won barely more than 12%. Polish Peasants’ Party managed to keep Warmińsko-Mazurskie and Kujawsko-Pomorskie, but it has lost the absolutely crucial voivodeships; those which the leaders of Polish Peasants’ Party come from and where the party’s influence was the strongest. I mean mainly Lubelskie and Świętokrzyskie voivodships.

How can we comment on the results of the other parties?

The Democratic Left Alliance (SLD) and Kukiz ‘15 received between 5 and 6%. Especially in the case of the second formation, this means very few seats. It can be said that Paweł Kukiz’s formation has entered a state of crisis and its leaders must think about how to revitalise their movement. However, they are still above the parliamentary threshold. But with such support they would have only 12 or 13 MPs, and that, only with a very lucky coincidence, would allow Kukiz’s formation to have joint control.

Will a weak Polish Peasants’ Party (PSL) result encourage this party to build the common lists with Civic Platform?

If its result had been at the level of a few percent, it would have happened, despite the fact that for the voters of this party an alliance with the increasingly left-wing Civic Platform would be difficult to accept. The result of a dozen or so per cent, although weaker than expected, forces members of Polish Peasants’ Party to act independently, especially in the European elections, which, as we know, will take place according to the old law. There are a few important politicians who want to stay or enter the European Parliament. And this is only possible if the Polish Peasants’ Party starts on its own. The results of the best members of the Polish Peasants’ Party in the European elections have been about 25 thousand votes. It is far too little to get to Brussels and Strasbourg from Civic Platform lists. With such a result you can only get from your own list.

So the election result makes it difficult for the opposition to unite?

Certainly, it makes it difficult to build a unitary anti-PiS (anti – Law and Justice), which would be a problem for the Law and Justice party. Is it possible to assess the chances of Law and Justice to renew its mandate to govern the whole country in next year’s parliamentary elections on the basis of its result of 34%? These results must not be compared directly either with the results of three years ago or with the expectations for 2019. This is a different rationality of voters. The overriding thing is what conclusions the Law and Justice authorities will draw from what has happened and what we have learned.

What have we learnt?

On the basis of Warsaw we know that the excessive turnout in large cities, stimulated by a strong political campaign, works against Law and Justice. If the turnout in the capital had been at the national level, it would have probably resulted in at least a second turn. The turnout of 66%, achieved thanks to the mobilization of dormant, Law and Justice reluctant voters in the capital, turned out to be fatal for the ruling party. But this is not the only conclusion, because thanks to these elections we also got to know a new map of Law and Justice’s social influence.

What results from this map?

First of all, it is obvious that the most important segment for Law and Justice are the voters who live in cities with 20,000 to 500,000 inhabitants. So, towns, medium-sized towns and large cities, but not metropolitan ones. In this segment Law and Justice won the elections, very clearly, but too low. If the result were higher by a few points, everything would be clear on a national scale.

But it was Law and Justice’s message that was addressed to the inhabitants of smaller towns.

Indeed, the main addressee, however, was the county-municipal Poland. It was this Poland that gave Law and Justice a decisive victory, because it also went to the elections in a rather collective way. The turnout in south-eastern Poland was also higher than usual; in the Lublin region it amounted to 53%. So Law and Justice managed to mobilize its voters as well. This is a result of the campaign conducted by Prime Minister Morawiecki. Riding around the country, he presented an offer which was very beneficial for provincial Poland: roads, modernisation of flats, pavements. These are not problems of big and rich cities but the poor municipalities. The Law and Justice campaign was also very effective; the victories with one or two mandates suggest that even small reserves have been used. Some commentators suggest, however, that taking into account the scale of social transfers, Law and Justice should have gained more votes. After these elections, it is already known that for the time being the possibilities of winning new voters through a simple social and economic offer have been exhausted. 500+ programme no longer works in these categories, because it has become obvious, it is already there. On the other hand, the subsequent programmes do not have such a big scale, they are not so common. One should also be careful not to cross the thin line that divides social acceptance for support for the poorer from negatively rated free-for-all distribution, which frustrates many social groups. This line cannot be crossed.

Tłum. KJ