Some background and the Constitutional Court's statement

The day after the news broke that János Lázár decided to disregard the thumbs-down decision of the constitutional court re the whopping 92% tax levied on amounts over two million forints received as either severence pay or as a retirement package Zsófia Mihancsik, a liberal journalist and editor-in-chief of Galamus, was taken aback that the constitutional court was silent. Most of the time I agree with Zsófia Mihancsik whom I consider one of the most democratically minded, talented and brave journalists in Hungary, but this time I thought that the constitutional court made the right decision. It is better to wait and see what the reaction is. Moreover, although I can't peer into the heads of the judges, somehow I don't think that they expected such a reaction from the government. So, they had to sit down and calmly assess the situation and only then come out with a dignified and well thought out statement. I think they managed to do that.

Before I translate part of the court's statement, let me say a few things about what we are learning about the background of the government's decision. According to some analysts the idea of the 92% surtax was hatched sometime during the summer. At roughly the same time Lajos Kósa--who by the way talks too much although not always in a coherent fashion--said something about temporary constitutional restraints concerning the economy. Some people consider that a sign that there were talks about coming up with such a tax and that the legally trained Fidesz leaders already knew that it would not float in the constitutional court. Hence the Kósa's reference to constitutional restraints on economic issues.

Yesterday Viktor Orbán's personal spokesman Péter Szijjártó tried to make a big deal out of this issue even though there were relatively few people who received substantial benefit packages. Why risk a confrontation with the constitutional court over a rather small amount of money which could easily be handled through the courts on an individual basis? This morning I heard an explanation that sounded logical to me. The Orbán government is planning to fire about 5% of the civil servants. Here the amount of money the government would have to pay by way of compensation would be considerable. They already took one step to reduce the rights of workers. Earlier a civil servant couldn't be let go without reason, but in the first days of the Orbán administration a law was passed that now allows the firing of civil servants without any justification and with only two months' notice. However, these people may be entitled to fairly large severance packages, and when we are talking about thousands and thousands of people the amount the government would have to dole out would be significant. Most likely that's why the government is so desperate to have this legislation passed that it is even willing to have a huge fight with the constitutional court.

As for who knew and who didn't know about the decision. Origo, the Internet paper, has very good connections with high-level Fidesz politicians who are ready to talk. Its journalists seem to know that the Fidesz answer to the constitutional court was Orbán's decision and most likely it was not discussed with too many people. We already know from Péter Harrach (KDNP) that he as head of the Christian Democratic caucus was not consulted. The Christian Democratic chief and deputy prime minister, Zsolt Semjén, also knew nothing about it. Since then in fact Harrach expressed his hope that the bill that was deemed unconstitutional can be modified.

But it seems that even Tibor Navracsics, the more important deputy prime minister of the two, wasn't privy to the decision. According to Origo's informant, Navracsics doesn't like "solutions that can be assailed on constitutional grounds." According to another informant who is a member of the party's top decision-making body, the presidium, there is the likelihood that they will change the bill in such a way that it may pass muster with the constitutional court the second time around.

Meanwhile the opposition is organizing but in typical fashion they cannot put aside their differences. András Schiffer, the leader of the parliamentary delegation of LMP, in an interview with Olga Kálmán that is already available in transcription verbally abused Ferenc Gyurcsány. I understand that László Sólyom had an aversion to Gyurcsány and that András Schiffer has a very close relationship with the former president, but sometimes it's prudent to follow the proverb that the enemy of my enemy is my friend. Well, the upshot of it is that LMP refuses to march together with the Hungarian Democratic Charta and Gyurcsány's new Democratic Coalition. They will march alone. I don't want to be a Cassandra but the last time LMP refused to cooperate with MSZP at the Budapest local elections LMP did very poorly. They lost about half of their voters. As it stands now the Democratic Charta will demonstrate on November 2 at 5 p.m. in front of the statue of Imre Nagy. As far as I know Gyurcsány will be one of the speakers. MSZP leaders will also attend, but the party has more grandiose goals and is planning a nationwide demonstration for November 27.

And now, at last, is the constitutional court's statement. András Sereg, the head of the press department of the court, stated that "the preservation of the unaltered legal competence of the Constitutional Court is the guarantee of the Hungarian constitutional order. The Hungarian court's practice of constitutional control of legislation agrees fully with that of other European constitutional courts. There are two requirements the court must keep in mind. The control must be applied to all pieces of legislation equally and those it deems unconstitutional are declared null and void."

As for changing the competence of the court, the institution "would like to call the attention of the government to the fact that the legislative body must consider the possibility of control emanating from the Court of the European Union and the Court of Human Rights on issues that it now wants to take away from the Constitutional Court." This is a court where the great majority of the judges is not antagonistic to Fidesz. To the contrary. Therefore I wouldn't advise Viktor Orbán to antagonize them. It would be bad strategy.

Comments

[Paul]

Are these demonstrations the first since the election?

If so, how will Fidesz react to them?

After recent events/speeches and reading some of the more purple pro-Orbán comments on here, I fear they won't just leave them to get on with it.

[Paul]

And, while I'm asking questions, can someone give me some background on this "98% tax on over 2 million Ft" business please.

Is this about one-off payments ('golden handshakes') or pensions, or what? And is the 2m Ft an annual amount or a monthly payment?

It's very hard to argue with my manically Orbán-worshiping relatives about this constitutional court business when I don't understand the background and can't answer even the most basic of their questions!

[pgyzs]

Paul: It is about the golden handshakes, and 2M is the annual amount. Problem is that people who gets above 2m because of their ~30 years (or more) spent at work were also involved. I highly support the tax on the outrageous goodbye sums (but not at the expense of screwing with the constitution, I strongly disagree with that), but this issue (which was pointed out by the constitutional court) has to be addressed. Today's news are promising about this:

http://index.hu/belfold/2010/10/28/megmentenek_a_kozalkalmazottakat_a_kulonadotol/

About LMP, they are making exactly the right call about Gyurcsány. He is a plague to every political ally of him and those of you who wish Orbán to be removed from the office in 2014 should pray that the "leader" of the opposition won't be Ferenc Gyurcsány. No matter what Orbán does, the people won't forget the chaos, impotence and corruptness of his regime and for many people, even Jobbik is a much better choice than him (which is a devastating possibility). After all, it would be a suicidal act for LMP to ally with Gyurcsány or the MSZP. If I was at home, I'd probably go to the LMP rally, but not if they joined Gyurcsány. This simple example shows that the opposition can cover much more voters separately.

[Hank]

"the legislative body must consider the possibility of control emanating from the Court of the European Union and the Court of Human Rights on issues that it now wants to take away from the Constitutional Court."

That is all very nice and well, and surely these "tigers in the corner" can be very valuable to upholding democracy in this country, but only and litteraly in the end. These are very, very, very slow operating institutions. Cases brought to EU courts may take years and what if someone then ignores their verdict? It is the same with the EU: sure they are worried, sure they do not trust Orbán's concept of democracy, but it will take a long time before they will start considering doing anything more than making critical remarks.

[whoever]

Eva, this just reflects what a disaster Gyurcsány is politically, a walking car crash of a public figure, and an absolute political ninny of the first order.

The fact he still feels he has to lead 'from the front' reflects on a fragile sense of ego and, I am afraid, a desire for revenge akin to that ascribed to Mr Orbán.

Ferenc Gyurcsány could support a number of opposition initiatives quietly, from the sidelines, yet this will never be enough. He forces people to divide on the basis of his own person - and becomes one of the reasons why any united opposition cannot emerge. He's become the spider in a left-wing web, big enough and ugly enough to make many people recoil. Seriously, someone should have a word with him - but they won't of course, because he is the boss. Risible approach to politics and I must say, barely a democrat in any shape or form.

[cba]

@whoever: yes indeed, its difficult to see any of the existing parliamentary party leaders actually delivering any coherent riposte and/or viable alternative to what is going on right now. Surely it is not setting the bar too high to ask whether there a decent, balanced non-egomaniac democrat out there to expose the idiocy of these people. The words Gordon and Bajnai spring to mind, but then again...

[Szabad Ember]

As much as I admire Gyurcsany, I have to agree that he is political plutonium; he'll never be anything but a divisive figure. I frequently ask Fidesz supporters why Orban Kiraly is still the leader of the party after losing 2 elections, and they always change the subject. If Gyurcsany wants to help Hungary, he'll stop trying to lead the party and confine himself to writing blogs and checks.

[NWO]

As much as I oppose the severance pay tax for the way it was implemented, and I support the Constitutional Court's decision (one of the few times I can imagine saying this), I would very much welcome a wholesale cutting of civil servants and others on the Govt payroll by 5%. I would prefer to see 10%, but 5% would be a nice start. Sad part is that FIDESZ will likely first target the few competent individuals instead of hacking off the thousands of totally useless civil servants.

[Szabad Ember]

On another topic, if Fidesz is desperate to pass a law taxing any payouts to civil servants who have yet to be sacked, why doesn't it just pass a non-retroactive law with a lower tax (75% is still very high)? I think 2 million forints is also a pretty low threshold. Maybe his aim all along was just to weaken checks and balances, and he using this issue as a pretext, because he knows that the public will be behind any move that recovers money "stolen from the state by the previous, corrupt, regime," regardless of its theoretical impact on obscure democratic principles (as the average voter probably sees this issue).

[Alias3T]

In fairness to Gyurcsany, who does make too much noise, he has stated that it's most unlikely he'll ever again be prime minister. And what he does have is the rhetorical toolkit to best Orban in debate. Nobody else has shown that ability, and until somebody shows up who is able to do that, he'll be hard to replace.

At some point, remember, Orban will have to descend into the arena of public debate again, something he hasn't really done since being slaughtered by Gyucsany in 2006.

[Hank]

"Maybe his aim all along was just to weaken checks and balances,"

My thoughts exactely. Because let's not forget that this isn't the first time they are changing the constitution to make it suit their preferences and to prevent the Constitutional Court from doing its job. They have done this up to ten times in the past few months and in a few cases the proposal to change the constitution was handed in together with the proposal to change a certain law.
So in a way, it is a bit funny that now suddenly everybody is up in arms about Lázárs move, because I don't see how it is fundamentally different from what they did before. What was different was that they first allowed the Court to say no to the law and then announced very bluntly and within hours (because they knew what was coming) that they would change the constitution to circumvent that, while untill now they did it the other way around. So this also makes me wonder whether this is a set-up in some way? But with what aim? And how well thought out?

And one other thing: OV will give us a totally different constitution sometime in 2011, anyway, in which he can lay down the powers of a Constitutional Court, if there will be any, as he sees fit. So why this hullabaloo now?

[Alias3T]

Hank, there is no qualitative difference between this and previous moves, but it's the drip-drip accumulation of moves of this kind that is making the difference. What's striking is the cumulative loss of faith I'm noticing among my jobb-nemzeti friends: the NENYI was the first blow, then the appointment of Schmitt, then the appointment of a party hack to the Audit Office... and it goes on.

None of these things, individually, undermined people's faith in the goverment, but each time the mumblings grew louder, and this is the first time I've seen straightforward party hacks, party appointees in ministries, complaining openly.

What it means, I think, is that the government majority will become harder to marshal. There's now political advantage to be had in being an awkward backbencher with independent positions. Look for that among the KDNP especially. And that bodes ill not just for this amendment - which may or may not pass - but also for the constitution.

Assuming this continues, and I don't see why it shouldn't, then Orban has either the option of doing deals for constitutional amendments with LMP or Jobbik - which would need a lot of compromise, or he has to do favours for individual backbenchers who would otherwise be waverers.

Dealing with Jobbik would cost him a lot of support from the moderate wing of the party. Daeling with LMP would require huge compromises on the constitution, which would mean the final document would probably differ little from the current one.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Alias3T: "And what he [Gyurcsány] does have is the rhetorical toolkit to best Orban in debate. Nobody else has shown that ability, and until somebody shows up who is able to do that, he'll be hard to replace."

You may have noticed that I said absolutely nothing on the newly erupted Gyurcsány bashing. Schiffer has been happily assisting Fidesz in the falsification of the events of September-October 2006. He stands by Morvai, Gaudi-Nagy, Balog, Balsai and others. One needs stomach for that and it seems that he has it. Shame on him.

[GW]

Alias3T wrote:

"...or he has to do favours for individual backbenchers who would otherwise be waverers."

I believe that this understates the amount of leverage that Orban has over individual members of his parliamentary party. These are not people who necessarily have good backup employment possiblities should they lose secure list places in future elections and with the complexities (oddities) of the new cabinet structure, patronage and pork belly decisions are largely concentrated in the PM's office. For FISESZ and KDNP parliamentarians, it's play or not get paid.

[GW]

May I add that Orban's position as PM vis a vis his parliamentary support is, within Europe, somewhat comparable to that of Berlusconi in Italy, a figure who a long tested the EU's patience with authoritarian moves. Berlusconi's own party members in parliament are decidedly without profile or experience other than personal loyalty. Berlusconi has used the office to decided personal advantage and limited any investigation of his activities. Orban's great advantage over Berlusconi is course the 2/3 support in parliament while Berlusconi has had to play wholesale politics to maintain a fractious coalition (and now, minority government.)

[Alias3T]

"These are not people who necessarily have good backup employment possiblities"

This is a good point, certainly. But you don't need many dissident MPs to fall short of 2/3s. What is it, 5? There must be at least five with other options.

[Mark]

Szabad Ember: "On another topic, if Fidesz is desperate to pass a law taxing any payouts to civil servants who have yet to be sacked, why doesn't it just pass a non-retroactive law with a lower tax (75% is still very high)?"

A the end of the day the notion of a redundancy payment - a compensation payment for the breach of an employment contract is protected by EU law, as, I think is the notion that such payments are tax free. Therefore their trade unions can go to get their payment (with interest) through the European Court, and the blunt truth is that there is nothing any Hungarian government can do to prevent that.

If we don't want to see ridiculous compensation payments in the future the way forward is to (a) have proper performance management for people in post, and (b) actually have an open, fair and competitive selection process for all government posts, with appointment based on criteria of professional competence. This would be a huge culture change, but the government has the opportunity to do this if it wants. I didn't see any sign of it though when they replaced the head of audit office or, for that matter, the Central Transdanubian Environmental Protection Agency.

[Pete H.]

Szabad, "Maybe his aim all along was just to weaken checks and balances, and he using this issue as a pretext, because he knows that the public will be behind any move that recovers money "stolen from the state by the previous, corrupt, regime," regardless of its theoretical impact on obscure democratic principles (as the average voter probably sees this issue)."

The 92% tax issue may very well be a pretext for weakening the Constitutional Court so that it can not rule on bigger issues like the new taxes on corporations and the pension fund issue. The later two are a huge part of OV's economic "solution" and the former only a very small and insignificant part of it.

[Paul]

Mark - my redundancy was most certainly taxed! (Although, admittedly, not at 98%.)

As for GF - every time I mention him or the MSzP to my Fidesz crazed family I am greeted by spittle assisted hails of condemnation. But never by any concrete facts, just broad accusations and general statements.

The Fidesz propaganda of the last 8 years has been highly effective. The average Hungarian now 'knows' without a doubt that the 8 years under he Socialists, and especially under GF, was a disaster.

Unfortunately, that propaganda seems to have worked its spell on many of the posters on here too. Can I request that the next time someone posts something against MSzP of GF, they first pause to consider just how much they know and how much they 'believe' because of the poison Fidesz has been spreading for 8 years.

And perhaps, when they post, instead of just agreeing with the assumed Fidesz view, could they give some concrete examples of why they consider the MSzP reign to have been so awful (in comparison with what came before it) and why they consider GF to be such a snake in the grass.

And Fidesz posters, before you put digit to key, perhaps you might like to consider that 8 of the last 20 years of apparently disastrous government in Hungary were in fact under the auspices of the right.

Let's stick to facts and sources on here and not quite so much received 'wisdom' and hot air.

[Bálint]

Gyurcsány is a truly repellent individual, god's gift to the right in general and antisemites in particular. While I'm not paranoid enough to believe that he's on the Fidesz payroll, he really might as well be. I don't know the last time that the author of the blog was actually in Hungary to suggest that LMP - or any other political grouping for that matter - wouldn't be shooting themselves in the face to be associating with him.

[Gábor]

W, Fidesz is hardly the centralized party submitted to Orbán's will entirely. It is much more complex and Orbán's real power lies in his charisma and ability to make people believe in him as the only one capable to realize the political aims. However, he is relying on a web of local key figures, controlling their locality/constituency based on their resoruces from civil life. In the process when Orbán sidelined or replaced the old guard of Fidesz he carefully barred them from establishing local bases or made them to choose between national and local political role. (Like Pokorni.) But he had no freedom to chose and install theri replacement, especially as Fidesz needed an institutional network and money to run campaigns. The result was the elevation of these local strong figures, either mayors or businessmen (in the Hungarian sense) who hoped for reward not only in the from of parliamentary seats.

They hold the key to Fidesz's success as they can mobilize voters with compelling them to vote for Fidesz, they chaneled money to the party in various forms and they expected money flowing to them and to their business after victory. It will not happen. (That is the reason the Esztergom mayor is still afloat as a Fidesz politicain.) But they can also revolt successfully, just look at Oszkár Molnár, the Edelény mayor.

[Gábor]

Sorry, the previous comment was meant to GW's comment on Fidesz MPs.

[Mark]

Paul: "Mark - my redundancy was most certainly taxed! (Although, admittedly, not at 98%.)"

Sorry, I got unduly carried away - compensation payment are protected from punitive taxation was what I should have written.

[Gábor]

According to the decisions of the Constitutional Court punitative taxation is a violation of the constitution per se.

[Mark]

Paul: "The Fidesz propaganda of the last 8 years has been highly effective. The average Hungarian now 'knows' without a doubt that the 8 years under he Socialists, and especially under GF, was a disaster."

I think before anyone gets too carried away with the old "Gyurcsány can never come back" line, it might be worth reminding those who remember the climate of the 1990 to 1994 period. I used to be told during those years that the MSZP could never come back because they ruined the country; they ran a dictatorship for 42 years before 1990; they made the country economically backward; they never had any support in the first place and ruled by fear. These opinions, for those who don't remember this period, were expressed in similar terms and with a similar vehemence to those directed against Gyurcsány now. Indeed, I remember someone trying to tell me in the first week on May 1994, in the face of lots of evidence to the contrary how Hungary - because of Communism, and because Horn served the Soviets in 1956 - would never vote for the MSZP the following Sunday. Well, they did .....

I'm not saying Gyurcsány will come back; and even less that he should. But before we say never (which is a very long time), we might want to a bit more cautious because there are precedents for 180 degree turns in Hungarian public opinion when the population decide a government is no good. Because people think something today, does not mean they will think it tommorow (and the changing political reputation of Orbán should be enough proof of that).

In 1990 they only polled 10.89% and won the subsequent election - that is a full 8.41% less than in 2010.

[whoever]

Paul, it was the tone, as well as the facts behind Gyurcsány's premiership which struck such a bum note - and not just restricted to the far-right. I'd say that up to a third of left voters developed an antipathy - not least as he failed to act as a responsible politician. The Ószod speech could have been dismissed as drunkenness, if it had not accompanied a huge degree of personal cynicism.

Bear in mind that his ascension in 2004 marked a period of fiscal and monetary laxity. In 2006 he won an election on the basis of tax cuts, and having won, set himself up a brave harbringer of fiscal austerity and the privatisation of the social security system, apparently in a way that was SPECIFICALLY designed to enrich MSZP/SZDSZ-supporting businesspeople. So if you see nothing wrong as Politics As Business, you will see nothing wrong with Gyurcsány.

Combine demands for austerity - and the positioning of rather false and contrived policy options, hence the famous 'Nem lehet mas a politika' speech - with a bizarre infrastructure policy - leading to some enormous, environmentally damaging, wasteful and yet ultimately lucrative schemes, and you just get a slight inkling of the dislike.

Then his response to the crisis in 2008 was bungled, as he announced a United Front of Visegradi countries demanding more cash, only to be told to bog off.

I accept that the attacks on Gyurcsány would have arrived from Fidesz in any case, not least because of his background. But to say that these were attacks generated entirely that Fidesz, and that he did not architect his own downfall (and still does) - well, you'd have to be out of the loop, frankly.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Balint: "Gyurcsány is a truly repellent individual, god's gift to the right in general and antisemites in particular."

In the pay of Fidesz? Gift to the anti-semites? Repellent? Surely, you can't believe the first. As for the second, what does that mean? He is Jewish? Mind you, in the circles you most likely move everybody is Jewish whom you people don't like. As for someone being repellent. He maybe repellent to you but not necessarily to someone else.

It would be a good idea to make more intelligent comments. These are too easily assailable.

[whoever]

I don't see the parallel between now and 1990-1994. At all. I think in that period there was more genuine optimism about the prospects for Hungary, and also an initial rush of enthusiasm for democracy. Much of this optimism and enthusiasm was not based on reality, sadly. Few people now would give any credence to the MSZP adopting welfarist policy lines, upon which it relied so much in 1994.

As for the MSZP, it has really struggled to bring in young people since 1990, and capable figures of the new generation are very hard to find. Younger career-minded, managerial types exist, but are not especially capable. The MSZP's roots in Hungarian society are ossified, and every year a dispropotionate number of its supports die. Which sounds bad, but what I'm saying is that there's no-one who's really come through.

It's a different scenario now. The majority of young people since 1990, do not want to know the Socialist Party in any shape or form. This generation are now having kids who are set to be equally anti. By 'screwing up' so badly 'again and again' the leadership of the MSZP, namely Gyurcsány, have tarnished leftist ideas for the forseeable future. His further public involvement merely prolongs the contamination and makes the clean-up harder still. I think it's really that simple.

[Hank]

"the privatisation of the social security system, apparently in a way that was SPECIFICALLY designed to enrich MSZP/SZDSZ-supporting businesspeople."

and

"a bizarre infrastructure policy - leading to some enormous, environmentally damaging, wasteful and yet ultimately lucrative schemes."

On both points I seem to be out of the loop, because - even though I do not like the MSzP at all and I know there are as much corrupt people there as there are in Fidesz, I still fail to see concrete examples of these specific issues. What privatization of the social security system? There wasn't any. What infrastructural projects are you talking about? The motorways? Though there no doubt was corruption there (as there is anywhere in the world), you cab hardly call these "enormous, environmentally damaging" and they have at least put Hungary solidly on the FDI map.

Yes, there was a lot of shady stuff at MÁV, BKV, Omninvest maybe, local governments (but then, these were in majority Fidesz in the past four years), but the notion that the Gyurcsány government was the most corrupt of the past two decades is, again, a Fidesz spin.

First and foremost, Gyurcsány got the boot because he insisted on painful reform (health care, social security, GYES, education etc.: no more populist lies, that is what Öszöd was actually about), because the majority of the Hungarian population was and still is unable to accept that but wants to believe whatever a smooth populist promises, and because Orbán cleverly used this situation (the referendum, the boycots, the force of the street, the "us and them" ideology, the communism card).
Having said that, I do agree that Gyurcsány should probably desist from playing a public role in politics for at least a few years because he is so divisive. Politics is not about being right, but about being perceived as to be right. He doesn't score well on that.
But who knows, when people get fed up with the Great Leader in a few years time, anything is possible again.

[whoever]

"But who knows, when people get fed up with the Great Leader in a few years time, anything is possible again."

That's the point, because I believe the opportunities for real change in Hungary are now prescribed by the failures and attempts to inflict unpopular agendas in the past. Maybe nothing will be possible in a few years, however fed up people may be. We are not in a period where multiple political possibilities are presenting themselves anywhere and the international economy is dictating events to a far greater extent than you, or Mark, seem to acknowledge.

Oh the charge sheet is too long to detail. On social security, the attempted reforms failed under prolonged opposition from various quarters, including Fidesz. On infrastructure, we can just look at the state of the railways, at the buses in Budapest, at the follies such as the 4-6 trams. It goes on and on.

But I don't think what I'm saying is quite sinking in, so I'll leave it there. Just, once more, that the 'Austerity Feri' between 2006 and 2009 hadn't really cleared the deal with the electorate. The electorate had gone for a flash fellow promising tax cuts, not him. Gyurcsány is not the solution, he is part of the problem.

[Alias3T]

Whoever, all you're saying is that anybody who won the 2006 elections wouldn't have "really cleared the deal with the electorate".

I don't see the basis for your antipathy; nor do I see that anybody at the time had a better prescription. Just about everybody in the late 2000s was saying "build motorways," because that was the key to the FDI story that was then in vogue. The opposition attacked the then government for not building enough roads, among many other things.

And I really never understood the problem with the 4/6 trams. However you asked the question, it always boiled down to "these are liberal trams, we hate them." Can you tell me?

[whoever]

Well, my understanding is that certain contracts didn't tell the whole story in relation to which money changed hands - and not only in relation to the trams, but also in relation to the related infrastructure, and the work required to change the road layouts etc. It's very hard to believe there was no funny business. It's very hard to believe that STRABAG as a motorway contractor didn't play a role in giving money the cash-rich, voter-poor SZDSZ.

What's normal? Win an election and do something totally different, or try to explain your plans and priorities for the years ahead? Neither Fidesz or the MSZP do the latter - but obviously it's a real problem if people promise one thing and then do precisely the opposite. It undermines faith in the electoral system.

[Alias3T]

These are two very eloquent criticisms of the Hungarian political system, and I couldn't agree more.

But then you turn round and tell me that the SZDSZ took bungs?!? Why did nobody tell me before?

And that the MSZP promised one thing and did the opposite??

I mean, why single out Gyurcsany on this? Or the SZDSZ? At that point, SZDSZ was still getting 7 per cent or so in national elections, so they weren't exactly voter poor. But every party has always financed itself from bungs - from former state officials whom they'd helped to oligarchdom in the early 90s, from slush funds linked to FDI in the 2000s, and now from the oligarchs they so thoughtfully created 20 years ago now that FDI has dried up.

(Somebody will correct me on the details; the broad narrative is right, however.)

As for electoral promises... Medgyessy kept his, uniquely, and that turned out so well.

There's nothing in what you said that warrants singling out Gyurcsany, or reserving for him a particular kind of purgatory. He may come back; he probably won't, certainly not the way he's playing things right now.

This "MSZP must die" stuff sounds like internecine fighting between two slightly different groups of Trots in the UK in the 70s.

[whoever]

What I don't get from this blog - from Eva or most of the contributors - is an acknowledgement of the levels of poverty in modern-day Hungary. I think it's down to a lack of regional analysis and the bias towards Budapest - actually, the bias towards just a couple of districts in Budapest. All I know is that when there is a debate on Gyurcsány here - which happens quite a lot, to be honest - no-one draws a link between the thousands of people sleeping in shanty-towns by the side railtracks, to those who are malnourished, and no-one attempts to quantify this in relation to the Gyurcsány governments policies. The real human effects of his government, in other words.

[Alias3T]

I can't speak for everyone, but yes, I've been, and I've seen.

But what makes you argue that this happened because of the Gyurcsany government, or that it even started on his watch? This goes back years - this goes back to the corrupt local oligarchies that emerged in the early 90s, it goes back to the closure of the factories, it goes back to the way the cooperative farms were transferred under suspicious circumstances to the ownership of local barons, making serfs of the people who lived in those villages.

Gy played his role; but why single him out?

As it happens, Bajnai is the PM who, to me, seemed to make the most honest attempt at addressing social exclusion. He talked about it even before he was PM, for a start.

[Hank]

"thousands sleeping in shanty-towns by the side railtracks, to those who are malnourished"

Again, I think there is huge exageration here. It is another new myth that Hungary has become so much poorer.
Let me start by saying that I do not live in Budapest and that, as part of my work, I travel all over Hungary, from the poorer quarters of Budapest to the small villages and poorer towns in the northeast. And I may not have looked well, but though I have seen shacks every now and then, especially in winter, I have never stumbled upon huge shanty towns. I've lived in Africa and I certainly would have noticed. The homeless problem in this country is serious and heart breaking, but it has been like that as long as I've lived here, since 1989.

Also, I do not think poverty has changed much, in quantity and quality, over the past 20 years. For the lower 10 or 20 or maybe 25% of the population life is still as it always was: a meagre existence without much prospect. This is certainly true for most of the gypsies and many elderly (certainly if their children leave them to themselves). Antall didn't change that, Horn didn't, Orbán didn't and Gyurcsány didn't. No need to single out anybody.
But the funny thing is, of course, that the most fervent supporters of a strong man who "sets things right", whether in a democratic way or not, are not the poorest of the poor, but those just above - male, white and working class - together with the polgári older generation (I seriously met ladies in perfect evening dress, jewels dangling from their necks and just coming out of a SUV, complaining how much worse life is today compared to the old days...excuse me?) The real mystery, to me, are the many youngsters who have jobs, modern lifestyles and pretty reasonable salaries, at least salaries there parents could only dream of, who are still not content but seem to hate anything that they perceive as being liberal or leftish. And why? I admit, I don't get it.

[Kormos]

Hank:
First I might say (not my words) :”Perception is everything”
Duna television has aired a program, which brought tears to my eyes.

http://www.dunatv.hu/musor/videotar?vid=668529

Should you have spare 55 minutes and if you or anybody more/less fluent in Hungarian language, please watch this programm.
Perhaps you will understand more about the feelings of descendants and other relatives of the people involved on the suffering side.
No matter what, only the very few will support anyone, who is connected to that past.
GY. F. and most of the prominent ,so called liberals and socialists are connected. We have no idea where Gy. F. would be without the Apro clan.
He could be the most talented, able bodied political figure, but he will never shake off that stigma.
1989 and the following change of the Constitution protected those who comitted hineous, and despicable crimes agains humanity.
Only the most brainwashed or well paid could deny, that Governments of 2006-2010 were the hotbed of corruption an disastreous policies. (Some may call those reforms)
Yes, finally things must be set right, whatever it takes!

[Kevin Moore]

whoever says: "The real human effects of his government, in other words."

Good point. But there are clues to the real human effects of Gyurcsány's government. His governance was bordered by mass suicide of farmers: think of the Hajdú-Bét case where Gordon B. played the main role, or when subsidies from the EU were not relayed to the farmers, violating the law. As a consequence, an extreme number of smallholders went bankrupt because they lost their markets to Slovakian and other farmers, even inside Hungary.

[Alias3T]

@Kormos. Thanks for the link, I'm about two thirds of the way through.

It's a moderately affecting documentary - I don't think I'll cry, though. As others have said elsewhere, it's crucial to document the crimes of the past, to give names to those who suffered injustice or worse. It's only one of the many, many great evils that struck central and eastern Europe from Estonia via Belarus to Greece in the 30s, 40s and 50s, but it's no less important for that.

But what bearing does it have on Gyurcsany? Or his wife?

[Paul]

"In 1990 they only polled 10.89% and won the subsequent election - that is a full 8.41% less than in 2010."

Sorry, Mark, I might be a bit thick tonight, but I didn't follow that. Could you expand on it for us poor older posters? Ta.

[Kormos]

To Alias3T

Why would you cry, if you or your ancestors were not inflicted?
The crying is not the salient point.
Perhaps I let a more competent person (let’s say Ms.Dr. Balogh) to explain the connection between Gy.F. and the Apro clan.
At the same time, I believe or feel; Mrs. Klara (Dobrev) Gyurcsan is far more intelligent than her husband.

[Paul]

"The real mystery, to me, are the many youngsters who have jobs, modern lifestyles and pretty reasonable salaries, at least salaries there parents could only dream of, who are still not content but seem to hate anything that they perceive as being liberal or leftish. And why? I admit, I don't get it."

As an outsider with strong Hungarian connections who lives there for a few months each year, this is a pretty fair summary of what I see and hear.

Every year I notice that people (in general) are better off and life is easier. Yet all I hear is complaint after complaint.

My brother-in-law was actually telling me quite strongly about how bad things were while we were standing in the garden of his newly purchased Dacha beside lake Balaton. Even when I pointed out the irony of this, it didn't affect his views one iota.

The problem with Hungary isn't Gy F or OV, or MSzP or Fidesz, or Jobbik, or the gypsies.

It's the Hungarians.

[Alias3T]

@Kormos, as I said, it's an affecting documentary. Thank you for passing the link, I was glad to spend 55 minutes watching it.

I didn't mean to be disingenuous, but of cuorse the former PM's wife is the grand-daughter of Antal Apro.

And yes, she inherited his house. But not his sins, surely? What's the problem with being somebody grandchild?

[Mark]

Paul: "Sorry, Mark, I might be a bit thick tonight, but I didn't follow that. Could you expand on it for us poor older posters? Ta."

Their position in 1990 was worse than it is today.

[Kevin Moore]

"Their position in 1990 was worse than it is today."

But they had prospects back then; not now.

[Paul]

Ah, ha! Thanks Mark, I had my 'they's mixed up and thought you were referring to OV's lot.

Anyway, after the 'New' Labour rout in 97, when the Tories were left broken and finished, with an old and dying support base, I no longer believe anyone's dead until they haven't moved for twenty years.

All Hungary needs is its own Brown and Cameron and all bets are off. And I'm sure we can count on OV to play the Blair role to perfection.

[Paul]

"And yes, she inherited his house. But not his sins, surely? What's the problem with being somebody grandchild?"

The sins of the father being the responsibility of the child? Now which party does that remind me of...

[Paul]

"But they had prospects back then; not now."

I don't understand this - could someone explain it to me please?

Some facts and sources would be nice too.

[Kormos]

Paul:
Select any party you like....but if you do not understand networking and connections, you do not understand Hungary. B.T.W. I did not fault her at all. Gy.F is something else...

[John T]

Select any party you like....but if you do not understand networking and connections, you do not understand Hungary. B.T.W. I did not fault her at all. Gy.F is something else...

Kormos - networking and connections are not unique to Hungary. And providing people are acting within the law, then where is the problem in using them. And to be honest, we all network or use connections to some extent.

Now if the connections or the individual do something illegal or break the law, that is a different matter, and they should be prosecuted within the correct legal processes.

[Paul]

"Gy.F is something else..."

This is exactly the sort of comment that I find so annoying. It tells me nothing except your bias.

Can you support it with some facts and sources?

This is a seriuous question. As someone who can't speak or read Hungarian and who has no TV in Hungary, and whose entire bloody Hungarian family do nothing but spout Fidesz propaganda (no specifics, no facts, nothing I can check, just hot air), I really have no idea what GyF actually did or didn't do. Just what Orbán has been telling everyone he did for the last 8 years.

As I keep saying, "some facts and sources would be nice..."

[Mark]

Paul: "no specifics, no facts, nothing I can check, just hot air"

Welcome to Hungarian political discourse.

Apologies for my cynicism, but Hungary's politicians have spent most of the past twenty years avoiding talking about the real issues facing the country. This applies roughly equally to left and right. Instead they have been engaged in a culture war about who is, or who is not a Communist (even though Communism is as dead as the proverbial dodo in Hungary, and not coming back anytime soon); Hungary's borders (although no Hungarian government has the power to change those by a milimetre, nor to do anything about those living beyond them except by the consent of the states on the other side). Meanwhile the other side of the spectrum has been trying to convince us that the strict application of free market policies plus the EU would solve all the country's problems (in the face of all the available evidence), and turn Hungary into Austria. And that anyone who vaguely questioned this nonsense was some kind of boneheaded far-left or far-right irresponsible populist.

[Mark]

John T: "Kormos - networking and connections are not unique to Hungary. And providing people are acting within the law, then where is the problem in using them."

Kormos's real point is about responsibility and redress. Antal Apró was the consumate political survivor, who even survived being removed from the head of the official trade union confederation in 1951 after being accused by Rákosi of syndicalism (defending the interests of the workers), and Kádár implicating him in his own forced confession after his arrest in "anti-party" activity; jumped the "right" way in 1956 and ended up running the Hungarian-Soviet Friendship Society well into the Kádár regime.

There is no doubt that the family wealth is due to the political career of Antal Apró, and that the family continues to be embedded in a number of influential networks close to the MSZP. And that Gyurcsány married into that family.

Whatever we think of the question of redress and responsibility we can at least understand the feelings of those who were deported, imprisoned, put to work in the mines, quarries and fields during the 1950s and after 1956. It doesn't take too much of a leap to grasp that those people might be offended by Gyurcsány's wealth and power.

Of course, however, we should recognize too that Gyurcsány's political views bear no resemblance to those of his wife's grandfather.

[Kormos]

“Bloody Hungarian Family” …..Sounds like a Gy.F. speech 
The National Investigating Bureau may eventually give you some of the facts.
Yes, I am strongly biased, but I am not a member of any party, not in Hungary and not anywhere else.
Furthermore, (similarly to some of this group) I live abroad, but spend considerable time in Hungary.
Naturally, I have my circle of middle and working class friends and relatives; and I trust them and their assessments of the situation. They coming from all side of the palette, so (I think) I have a fair information package.
Both side of the “Spectrum” pukes innuendoes.
No “facts” Paul, I would not open up myself to a libel suit I cannot afford. Do not believe for a moment that the internet is a free and innocent forum for discussions.
Mark is the only somewhat sober voice here.

[An]

@Paul On Gyurcsany: One obvious mistake is the Oszod speech... the fact that he and his party lied about of the state of affairs of the country to win elections, which he acknowledged in the speech.

Now it is really not something doesn't happen in politics all the time (parties lying to win elections).. and you can see the speech as a candid effort to wake MSZP up about untenability of their populist policies. Ironically, a very honest speech got Gyurcsany labelled to be a liar.

The rest that the right is trying to Gyurcsany to take court for, I think, is a part of a political witch hunt that Fidesz is generating in order to deflect attention of its own doings.

I think he is a pretty bad politician: how on earth he thought that a speech like that can be kept confidential? He also should have resigned after that scandal broke. I also didn't like some of his moves while he was in office.. why exactly he had to sell Malev to the Russians? A few things like that, but nothing of the devilish sort that the right is now accusing him of doing.

I do not like Gyurcsany, but I find the overblown hatred toward him misguided and disgusting.

[John T]

No “facts” Paul, I would not open up myself to a libel suit I cannot afford.
Eh? If you were quoting speculation or mischevious gossip, that might be the case. But not for indisputable and published facts. Unless this is what people have to look forward to under the new media law.
I normally visit Hungary about twice a year, which totals about 1 month in the country. I have lots of family there and a few friends and to be honest, I have difficulty getting to find out what people really think, apart from hearing that life is crap and everyone is corrupt. After that its a dismissive wave of the hand. But this is the problem, the "grass roots" will moan, but don't do anything positive to make things better. Hence you have the mediocre politicans that have plagued the country since 1989.

[Kevin Moore]

"Ironically, a very honest speech got Gyurcsany labelled to be a liar."

This is f00kin' ridiculous. You clean the devil. This was a "honest" speech, yes much like among gang members when they plan their crime. That is 'honest' speech too.
His speech was summarizing everything they very well knew, he openly spoke about having lied, but it was addressed just to the inner circle - sure as hell not meant for the public. This was not a 'speech of honesty', this was intended to be kept secret, and they continued to lie on the outside for months.
And the lies had continued after the speech got out, they just took a different direction - to falsify the essence of the speech as if it was intended to close an era of lies and turn onto the way of honesty. This is, again, ridiculous.
Fortunately, the lies didn't work.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Mark: "...we should recognize too that Gyurcsány's political views bear no resemblance to those of his wife's grandfather."

Moreover, as far as I know he was already quite wealthy when he met Klára. In 1994. From what I gather it was love at first sight and I have the feeling that it had nothing to do with Klára's family connections. It happened that way.

[Eva S. Balogh]

An: ".. why exactly he had to sell Malev to the Russians?"

I guess because no one else wanted it.

As for resigning after Őszöd, I don't think it would have been a terrific idea. Then Fidesz would have had four more years to do what it is doing now.

[An]

@Kevin: "This is f00kin' ridiculous. You clean the devil. This was a "honest" speech, yes much like among gang members when they plan their crime."

Are you suggesting he lied when he said they were lying?

[Paul]

'Kevin' (what is your real name, by the way?), you are so twisted up in your irrational hatred of GyF that you can't see anything else.

If you met him one day and he said 'Jo napot kívánok' you'd immediately be jumping up and down, turning red and shouting "he's lying, he's lying!".

You really have no place on this blog. Just spend a few minutes sampling the threads and reading the comments. Almost all the other posters write calmly and politely.

In fact it's only ever the Fidesz supporters who get so carried away on here. It's one of the reasons I went from being fairly neutral about OV and Fidesz to being strongly anti. And I would imagine this applies to many of the other posters too.

You don't do yourselves any favours.

[Kevin Moore]

Paul, I'm not surprised that your whole 'response' is about me, not about what I wrote.
This somehow usually applies to left-wing 'think tanks' (note the irony).
Your excuse about why you went from 'neutral' (HAHA) to anti-Fidesz makes me laugh.

[Szabad Ember]

Kevin Moore,

I agree with Paul; your tone and your dismissive attitude towards left-wingers make your argument seem like the rantings of a madman. If you are actually a left-winger yourself who is just trying to discredit extreme right-wingers, then you're doing a good job, but you're cheapening the discourse, which is not welcome here. If you're actually a right-winger, you're making right-wingers as a group look like jerks, which I'm guessing they wouldn't appreciate.

You should make intelligent, thoughtful comments or go find a group of readers who are looking for such bombast (try politics.hu).

[Kevin Moore]

Szabad Ember, my attitude is dismissive only towards extreme left-wingers. They, in my opinion, deserve it. It doesn't matter if you make thoughtful comments here or not if you aren't a Fidesz hater - you will be greeted with exactly the same yammer.

[Eva S. Balogh]

Szabad Ember: "Kevin Moore, I agree with Paul; your tone and your dismissive attitude towards left-wingers make your argument seem like the rantings of a madman."

I find his latest comment about us being underinformed especially objectionable. The fact is that Gábor is right about the lack of reforms concerning health care. Yes, they came out with a vague announcement but nothing what Kevin Moore reads into it. The most ridiculous part of it was that from here on June 1 will be a holiday. Oh, yes, all the hospitals will be closed!!!

[Eva S. Balogh]

Kevin Moore: "my attitude is dismissive only towards extreme left-wingers."

You're terribly mixed up. Mark, the only person whom you seem to respect here, is actually further to the left than let's say me or An or Gábor.

[Mark]

Éva: "You're terribly mixed up. Mark, the only person whom you seem to respect here, is actually further to the left than let's say me or An or Gábor."

I was actually quite amused at thought of being a FIDESZ house-trained commenter. Yes, I do comment here from a left-wing position. But maybe my position seems strange in a Hungarian context, because I do not believe that left-wing views have anything to with economic liberalism (as a researcher in Hungary's ex-industrial areas I've watched such policies destroy the lives of the people who live there, just as I watched the Thatcher government do the same where I grew up ten years earlier) and that the MSZP is a twisted caricature of a genuine left-wing party. From my perspective Gyurcsány is as much a "polgári" politician as Orbán, and both of them with put big business before jobs, security and the environment.

[An]

@Mark: Yes, it’s is interesting how the Hungarian left and right does not confirm to the western European or the American ideas of left and right … In the West there seems to be a strong movement to critique capitalism, as a system, from the left and from environmentalists, especially in the wake of the recession of the last couple of years.

But it is one thing to be critical of capitalism in a country where capitalism and democracy (though the two don’t necessarily have to go together) has strong roots and another in a country where both the economic and political system is relatively new. I think there is a better chance that in the West the criticism of the capitalist system may lead to some progressive change. We shall see.

In Hungary the anti-capitalist critique tend to receive a strong nostalgic undertone (turning back to the more authoritarian and in some ways almost feudal political systems of the early 20th century). I think this is the line Fidesz is representing. Really, the socialists have been kind of pushed into being pro-market and pro-democracy (though parts of the MSZP are less so than others), as this new capitalist democracy is quite frail and it is probably a phase that you just cannot skip and move on to whatever it is that’s better than this (we saw an experiment to do just that, communism, and that failed spectacularly).

There is some of the “new-left” and environmentalism represented in LMP, but that party is such a mix of different ideas that it is hard to see what they stand for. And unfortunately, they skepticism toward the capitalist system leads them sometimes to side with Fidesz’s anticapitalist rhetoric.. . and I think that is truly tragic.

[Paul]

Szilárd, much as it might surprise you, I was very much neutral when I first started reading this blog back in August. My first post was actually a (genuine) question as to whether or not I should be worried about Orbán.

Unfortunately, it didn't take me long to realise that, yes, I should be worried. And one of the main contributary factors to this confirmation was the rabid attacks posted on here from what were clearly Fidesz moles.

[Szabad Ember]

Kevin Moore,

I applaud you for rejecting extremism, even if you seem to only feel that it's a vice for left-wingers. Still, you're using a tone that is not helpful to anyone, and language that signals your inability to reason like someone who cares at all about other people's opinions. I do understand that you feel personally attacked, but rising to such bait does you no favors, believe me.

I am, economically speaking, a conservative, but Orbán only pretends to be. What he is, really, is a populist who feels that whatever position sells is the right one for the moment. Punitive taxes on multinationals and pensioners is not conservative. Cutting ties with the IMF is not conservative, nor is cajoling the EU into letting you raise the budget deficit. Orbán's only ideology is getting in power and staying there, mostly to enrich himself and his friends. A true conservative doesn't attack democracy, she attacks wasteful spending, job-killing bureaucracy, corruption, and unnecessary government (and not just when the opposition is in power). Maybe Orbán will do some of these things, but only when it serves his other, more selfish purposes. I fear that he may discredit conservatism in Hungary to the point that Communism makes a real comeback, not the phantom one that Jobbik keeps harping on about.

Anybody who defends Orbán while ignoring that fact that he is clearly on the path to dictatorship is missing the point, in my opinion. The only good thing about Fidesz and the KDNP at this point is that they have kept Jobbik at bay, so far.

I look forward to the day that we can talk about normal problems like the proper role of the state and the best level of government regulation, rather than how far Orbán will go in destroying democracy in Hungary. Nursultan Nazarbayev might indeed be taking notes, as might Vladimir Putin and Alexander Lukashenko.

[Paul]

An excellent post, SzE, and a very good summing up of why so many of us on here feel so uneasy about OV.

Unfotunately, there is very little chance of Szilárd/Kevin understanding what you say, let alone accepting it and shutting up.

[Kevin Moore]

Szabad Ember, it's excellent, you basically do nothing more than summing up the 'left' extremists' - they're not left, by the way - 'arguments' Népszava-style, and I should come around and accept your widsom? Your claims about Orbán building a dictatorship, not being conservative but only populist, and being only selfish and for power - these are the most ridiculous 'arguments' fuelled by hatred and void of any sense or endeavour for analytic thoughts.

They're, in fact, not even worthy of considering. I'm desperately trying to find one person capable of reasoning other than Mark - zero success so far.

[Paul]

It's a good tactic, Szil, this singling out Mark with faint praise, to (presumably) make the rest of us feel jealous - divide and conquer.

But it's also very transparent. It won't work, so save your time and effort.

You'd be better off trying to steel yourself to write a post that doesn't include random purple prose and scattered insults. You have managed it once or twice before, so we know you can do it.

Still, I suppose we should feel flattered that your handlers are rattled enough by this blog to start trying slightly more sophisticated tactics. Was it Éva's revelation of her high readership that did it? All those people in all those countries reading all these hatred-fueled, extreme left-wing lies, eh? Terrible.