In January 2009, the agenda was determined by two
crises. In the beginning of the month, Russia stopped its gas shipments to
Europe due to a row with Ukraine;
however, Hungary
had enough reserves to come through the crisis relatively unscathed. From
mid-January, the international financial crisis became dominant news again,
after PM Ferenc Gyurcsány conceded that the economy might do worse than even
the most pessimistic predictions had suggested.
In the first month of 2009, public attention was again centred on the
international economic crisis. After IMF Managing Director Dominique
Strauss-Kahn’s visit to Hungary, it turned out that the prospects of the
Hungarian economy were worse than expected, consequently the budget needed to
be modified. In October, the crisis was seen as an opportunity for the
government in spite of its obvious political dangers, but now, the situation
seems to be more in line with the Fidesz’s interpretation of reality. The MSZP
did not make any serious mistakes, but there is an increasing need for specific
measures to back up the party’s messages. These – according to the Prime
Minister – are to be announced in early February; their reception may have a
significant impact on the outcome of the 2010 elections. The Fidesz has gained
considerable experience in attacking the government’s crisis management and
Ferenc Gyurcsány’s person simultaneously. The opposition party has started its
preparations for the European elections; its strategy in spring is likely to
serve one purpose: getting out the vote. The so-called gas crisis also had a
large share of the January agenda: as a result of a conflict between Russia and Ukraine, the former
stopped its gas shipments to Europe. Due to
its huge supplies, Hungary barely felt the effects of the crisis;
paradoxically, this entails that the government is unlikely to be rewarded for
its confident handling of the situation. Another event worth mentioning is that
Miskolc Police Superintendent Albert Pásztor was relieved of his position after
he made controversial comments about gypsies (31. 01.), but the great pressure
from local politics and society soon saw him reinstated (01. 02.). Ferenc Gyurcsány
revisited the idea of a smaller parliament, proposing to reduce the number of
representatives from 386 to 199, and change the current mixed electoral system
to a proportional one (01. 02.). Also, a
smog alert was ordered in Budapest
for this first time in the capital’s history (11. 01.).
In January, the ratio of government topics continued its decrease and
was, for the first time in eight months, surpassed by the ratio of the
opposition’s topics (Graph 1). It is telling to compare the current numbers to
those of October, the month when the first wave of the financial crisis arrived
in Hungary. The government usually has better results in the beginning of the
year, and the same can be said for Hungarian politics as a whole: the ratio of
topics favourable for one side or the other did not even reach 50 percent.
Individual parties were somewhat more active than in December, especially the
MSZP (Graph 2).
The economic crisis returned to the forefront of attention in
mid-January. After his meeting with IMF leader Dominique Strauss-Kahn, Ferenc
Gyurcsány conceded that the economy’s prospects were even worse than expected
(13. 01.). As a greater recession was predicted, the budget needed to be
modified in order to prevent a huge increase of the deficit. This new state of
affairs left the government with a serious challenge on both the economic and
the political level. So far, no concrete measures have been taken, so talk was
more about intentions and plans. Like in October, the MSZP endeavoured to avert
responsibility for the difficulties, and for the potential restrictions that
may follow. In connection with that, the socialists had two disagreements with
the Fidesz. Firstly, they treated the worsening prospects as an external
circumstance that could not be foreseen. On the other hand, the Fidesz
emphasized that no new information turned up concerning the crisis, thus bad
planning was a result of the government’s incompetence alone. Secondly, the
opposition claimed that the budget failed, and demanded that a new proposal be
submitted by the cabinet. The MSZP rejected this possibility, which would have
led to a risky procedure in the parliament and a grave loss of prestige. Other
than that, the government came up with the same messages as before. Prime
Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány called for an extraordinary session of the parliament
(15. 01.), to which the MSZP later invited the public dignitaries and the
leaders of the most important social and economic organizations as well (19.
01.). The meeting, similar to the national summit in October, followed the
usual scenario (29. 01.). This month, however, the Prime Minister spoke about
more than just reforms: he urged the participants to rethink the economic model
as a whole, and to create – among others – a new national strategy.
The Fidesz had three distinct messages in January. The opposition party
continued to claim that Ferenc Gyurcsány had lost too much credibility to lead
the country, thus real crisis management could only come after early elections.
They were able to exploit the fact that in a fast-changing economic
environment, the policies of the government inevitably need some correction
from time to time, which may easily be interpreted as hesitation. The Fidesz
went as far as to propose the dissolution of the parliament, effective 8th
March (27. 01.). The MSZP and the SZDSZ voted against the immediate discussion
of this proposal, but nevertheless it managed to divert some attention from the
parliament’s extraordinary session on the 29th. Another stream of
messages focused on the cabinet’s alleged squandering of money, which, in the
midst of a crisis, was deemed a proof of its insensitivity by the opposition
party. They brought up issues – such as the Ministry of Finance’s purchase of
luxury cars for HUF 22 million (14. 01.) – which had little impact on the
“bigger picture”, but could easily be understood by the average voter. Much
more importantly, the Fidesz has started its preparations for the European
elections. Chairman Viktor Orbán claimed that 2009 could bring about the
opportunity for change, but only if the Right, and then the whole nation joined
forces. He emphasized that the European elections would be the first step in
this new direction. It therefore seems that the opposition intends to increase
the stakes of an otherwise moderately significant event in the same way as it
did – with great success – before the referendum in March 2008. It came as no
surprise when the winner of the by-election in Budapest’s ninth district – a Fidesz
politician – declared that his victory marked the beginning of the year of
change (26. 01.).
The gas crisis, the result of a row between Russia and Ukraine, was the
leading issue in the first two weeks of January, but it also remained on the
agenda later on. Gas shipments were reduced on the 2nd, stopped
altogether on the 6th, and resumed only on the 20th. The
man in charge of the crisis was Csaba Molnár, appointed Minister of Energy a
month ago. He had two tasks: to inform and to reassure people. The government
claimed that, thanks to the storage tanks built in 2006, Hungary was better
prepared for gas shortages than its neighbours, and if restrictions needed to
be placed on consumption, the population would be the last to be affected. In
the end, only a few factories had to switch to alternative fuels, and as the
weather improved, there was even some gas left to export. Throughout the three
weeks of the crisis, the cabinet stayed in control of the events, but precisely
because people did not really feel the shortage of gas, no political reward is
likely for that, in spite of the issue’s strong presence on the agenda. As the
crisis was caused by external factors, and the cabinet made no mistakes, the
opposition tried to appear constructive instead of criticizing the MSZP. Fidesz
politician Ferenc Ódor, chairman of the National Alliance of County Governments
(Megyei Önkormányzatok Országos
Szövetsége) proposed a three-day holiday in municipal schools to save gas (08.
01.), while SZDSZ Chairman Gábor Fodor called for an “environmental revolution”
(08. 01.). After the crisis, Ferenc Gyurcsány too began to look for an
alternative to Russian gas: on his trip to the Middle East,
he enquired about liquid gas (21-22. 01.), and he gave his full backing to the
Nabucco project. An international conference on the gas pipeline was held in Budapest (27. 01.).
The January list of politicians who have appeared on the media’s agenda
reveals a fundamental difference between the division of labour within the MSZP
and the Fidesz (Graph 3). In the largest opposition party, Viktor Orbán speaks
rarely and only on important occasions, while several other politicians are in
charge of the daily routine. In the socialist party, on the other hand, Ferenc
Gyurcsány deals with almost all relevant issues personally. This strengthens
his position, but leaves the MSZP with fewer options. The performance of Csaba
Molnár this month is the exception that proves the rule: the minister came to
the limelight in connection with the mostly apolitical gas crisis. Overall, the
Prime Minister had a rather good month, is spite of the winter break (Graph 4).
For Viktor Orbán, there have not been any trends or outstanding values for a
long time: the leader of the opposition usually has few appearances, and is
only active in campaigns.
Print article 