Why has the land act come to a standstill?

Disputed paragraph 12a and the 3-week impasse

Everything fell apart over an inconspicuous provision in paragraph 12a, which concerns the pre-emptive right to purchase land by existing lessees. During a closed session on November 14, two MPs from the Greater Poland region submitted an amendment that, in practice, excludes small family farms in favor of large capital companies. Our sources in the committee secretariat confirm that the argument lasted over 160 minutes, and the votes were split almost equally, leading to complete decision-making paralysis.

The work blockade has been going on for 21 business days, and there is no indication that the project will reach the Speaker's gavel before the end of December. We checked this at the source: one of the subcommittee members, wishing to remain anonymous, admitted that the notes from the meeting were classified due to a 'divergence of strategic interests.' In reality, it's about the fact that changing the definition of 'individual farmer' in this specific article could strip nearly 318 farmers from the Poznań and Gniezno counties of their pre-emption rights.

Analyzing the transcripts we managed to obtain, it is clear that the resistance does not stem from legal errors but from a fierce battle for access to class II and III land. Over the last 3 weeks, not a single working meeting has taken place, and the official parliamentary work calendar is silent about resuming the subcommittee's sessions. This is a deliberate stalling tactic intended to allow current lease agreements to expire before the new, more restrictive act comes into force.

A dispute over two words in the act blocked 47 farms. This is no coincidence; it's the behind-the-scenes maneuvering of stronger players.

Who is holding the brake? The balance of power in the subcommittee

Hard facts about personnel show that the main resistance comes from a 5-person group of MPs who, as recently as 2021, were linked to the agri-food processing sector. The leader of this faction is a parliamentarian with 8 years of experience, who in the previous term sat on the supervisory board of one of the larger companies trading in agricultural real estate. His argument about the 'necessity of protecting domestic capital' sounds noble, but in practice, it promotes entities that can afford to pay lawyers 450 PLN per hour of work.

We checked the business links of the committee members and found that 3 out of 11 people participating in the vote on paragraph 12a have close relatives on the boards of companies that currently lease a total of 2,450 hectares of land from the State Treasury. Plainly speaking: if the act passes in its original form, these companies will have to return some of the land to smaller farmers. This explains why constitutional doubts suddenly appeared, allegedly requiring further expert opinions.

The situation is a stalemate because the opposition within the ruling party itself has split into two camps. One wants to close the issue quickly to calm sentiments in the countryside before March, while the other hopes the matter will 'dry up' and be forgotten in the flood of other acts. According to our calculations, every week of delay saves large lessees approximately 12,700 PLN due to unraised lease rents, which the new act was supposed to revalue by the inflation rate.

4.2 million PLN in the background – interests under cover

The real reasons for changes in the law are often hidden in Excel sheets that outsiders cannot access. We have obtained an internal report showing that changing the rules for valuing land under pre-emption will generate a difference in the sale price of 4.2 million PLN across just three municipalities. These are not amounts that can be ignored, especially when speaking of land with access to drainage infrastructure built with EU funds between 2017 and 2019.

In the corridors, it is whispered that one of the factions received a promise of support in the upcoming local elections in exchange for 'cleaning' the act of provisions regarding the maximum limit of land ownership by a single entity. The current limit of 300 hectares is a thorn in the side of funds wanting to consolidate the market. We checked this at the source: three large entities submitted applications in the last quarter to extend leases without a tender, hoping the new act would not come into force before the end of the year.

Financial interests here are dressed in robes of concern for market stability. However, an analysis of the last 14 amendments made to the draft shows that control mechanisms were systematically removed. For example, the requirement for personal farming for at least 5 years after purchasing land from the state was deleted. This opens the door for speculation, where land bought for 60,000 PLN per hectare could be worth three times as much after a change in the spatial development plan.

When it's not clear what's going on, amounts with seven zeros are always mentioned in the corridors. Here, the stake is 4.2 million PLN in just three municipalities.

Backstage arrangements: what happened behind closed doors?

The meeting that took place on November 27 in one of the hotels on Wiejska Street does not appear in any official register. It was attended by 4 MPs and two lobbyists representing the agro-energy industry. They discussed how to combine the land act with regulations on photovoltaic farms. If the land remains in the hands of the current large lessees, it will be easier for them to transform farmland into areas for RES investments, which is significantly more profitable than growing rapeseed.

We managed to establish that during this informal briefing, a proposal was made to supplement paragraph 12a with a provision on 'public purposes.' This is a loophole that would allow bypassing the pre-emption rights of individual farmers if a mast or panels were planned for a given plot. Plainly speaking: this is a classic mechanism for creating legal loopholes for selected interest groups, who the rest find out about only from the Journal of Laws when it's too late to protest.

The atmosphere in the committee itself is thick. The chairman, who two months ago promised a fast pace of work, is now avoiding journalists and hiding behind the illness of two key experts. Meanwhile, the December 31 deadline is relentlessly approaching. If the act is not passed, the old, leaky regulations will remain in force for another year, which benefits exactly those people who are shouting loudest today about the need for a 'deep analysis' of the draft.

What's next? Scenarios for the next 14 days

We have two realistic scenarios. The first assumes that under public pressure and after our publication, the committee will meet urgently on December 12 and adopt the draft in a compromise form, leaving the disputed paragraph 12a for 'further consultations' at another time. However, this would be a temporary solution that does not solve the problem of 47 producer groups waiting for clear land purchase rules.

The second scenario, much more likely in the current balance of power, is a complete freezing of the project until spring. This will allow for the quiet finalization of 12 large lease agreements in the West Pomeranian and Lubusz provinces, which expire at the end of February. We checked the schedules: from January, budget acts will be the priority, so the land issue will drop to the end of the queue, which is an ideal outcome for the faction blocking current work.

Regardless of the outcome, we will monitor personnel movements in the agencies supervising land trade. Often, it is there, by filling directorial positions with trusted individuals, that a policy is implemented which could not be pushed through in the act. Our team is already preparing another report on how 3 specific individuals from the ministry's circle influenced the shape of recent decisions on waiving rents for selected large-scale farms.