February saw the beginning of the spring session of
parliament which resulted in an exceptionally eventful political agenda. PM
Ferenc Gyurcsány delineated his crisis management package, followed by the
Refrom Alliance′s (Reformszövetség) own, more radical proposals. Following two
brutal and 'media compatible' murders, the situation of public security and
Hungarian gypsies – which in some cases overlap – dominated the agenda for a
longer period of time.
In February 2009, the economic crisis continued to be the
dominant factor of the political agenda. However, the nature of the discourse
was greatly changed by the fact that by that time instead of plans, the debate
was about concrete programs. On the opening session of the parliament Ferenc
Gyurcsány outlined the governments crisis management package (02. 16), which
was followed by the announcement of the more drastic suggestions of the Reform
Alliance - which was formed by prominent experts (02. 21.). The SZDSZ and the
MDF quickly stood behind the latter, while Fidesz - referring to the European
examples - upheld its view that it is impossible to get out of the crisis
through austerity measures. The other important issue of the month simultaneously
affected public security and the situation of the Hungarian gypsy community.
The problems concerning the Hungarian Roma integration are well known, however
recently - partly because of the activity of the 'Hungarian Guard' (Magyar
Gárda), they have become more and more a part of everyday politics. In February
this question came to the center of attention because of two crimes which
kicked up dust. Concerning the other events of the month, the MP′s voted twice
about the dissolution of the parliament, nevertheless, neither the Fidesz′s
proposal, neither the national civil initiative was successful. The SZDSZ
started its so called 'tolerance campaign' in which the small party would like
to rally voters for the EP elections through accentuating rather its cultural
values instead of its economic ones. One case must be mentioned which - in
comparison with its importance - did not receive enough attention: János
Zuschlag′s confession had practically no mention in politics.
After decreasing for a quarter of the year, the topics
favourable for the cabinet once again rose, though it is still not outstanding.
(Graph 1.) The increasing performance is a result of the fact, that next to a
more intensive crisis management the cabinet could also manifest itself along its
own conceptions concerning public security. The topics of the opposition have
stagnated at an exceptionaly low rate for more than half a year now, which
proves that the influence excersized over the political agenda is not connected
directly to the public support of a given political force. Following its
October summit the MSZP set a new record concerning the number of appearances
during the period. (Graph 2.) The MDF was more active as well, compared to
itself, while the Fidesz and the SZDSZ was average. In the case of the biggest
opposition party, the constraint, while with the liberal democrats, the
possibility is what is lacking for a more influential presence in the political
agenda.
In February the crisis served with an unpleasant surprise
almost everyday: disilusioning statistics and predictions followed one another
while the Forint′s exhange rate and the Budapest Stock Exchange set negative
records time and time again. In this situation the cabinet′s long-awaited
action plan was preceeded by exceptionaly great expectations. The wait was
heightened by PM Ferenc Gyurcsány, who amongst others promised the 'most
comprehensive tax reforms' of the past years. (02.09) In comparison, the
program which was outlined at the commencement of the spring session of
parliament once again showed that the Prime Minister had to balance carefuly
amongst the different expectations and points of views. On one hand he had to
harmonize economic rationality with the country′s endurance, on the other hand
his own ideas with those that the MSZP would support. This double-restriction
inevitably led to the compromise laden program which was introduced on the 16th.
It was also certain that the prime minister′s plans would be faced with
critique from two - totally opposite - sides. Thus, it can be said, that three
sides were formed in Hungarian public life concerning the crisis management. The
side represented by the socialist party, referring to the above mentioned
tension between the neccessary and the feasible, jousted by the bearable
corrections. The economists, however argued, that a greater catastrophe could
only be evaded by drastic restrictions. They - followed by the SZDSZ and the
MDF - called the cabinet′s crisis management program a small step taken in the
right direction. The third camp - principaly the Fidesz - deny the neccessity
of any sort of restrictions. Accordingly, the opposition party called Ferenc
Gyurcsány′s proposed steps not only 'brutal restictions' but 'the program of
hopelessness'. The MSZP on the other hand, emphasized once again, that its
rival did not speak of its own ideas, from which, they came to the conclusion
that the Fidesz is actually at a loss.
The Reform Alliance′s suggestions strenghtened the camp of
those supporting economic rationality which could be seen by the reception of
the program. The Fidesz could not support the strict measures even if they did
not come from the untrustworthy cabinet but from a group of highly respected
proffessionals. The opposition party did not need to change its reasoning: they
continued to contrast the 'european way' of crisis management based on tax cuts
as opposed to restrictions. From the part of the PM this alternative program
means both danger and a possibility at the same time. It makes it evident that
the cabinets program was created thrugh a series of compromises. On one hand
this could undermine the competent 'crisis manager' image that the MSZP has
been trying to construct since October. On the other, through the contrast, it
is easier for Ferenc Gyurcsány to argue that he, - wherever he can - is
considerate of the nation′s endurance. The Prime Minister called the Reform
Alliance′s proposals impressive, but added that their social effects would be
'chilling' (02.21.). On the contrary, the SZDSZ and the MDF stood by the
proposed measures one hundred percent. The small parties could hardly have
reached such publicity with their own programs than currently with the Reform
Alliance′s program. It is also favourable that now they can stand by the
reforms without having to implicitly support the cabinet. A smaller 'race'
began among the two parties about which one supports the alternative program
more. As a result they handed in a proposal for the acceptance of the program
to the parliament at the same time (02.27.). In the last week of the month the
MDF took a great risk in order to have the upper hand in the field of economics
over its rivals: the head of the party Ibolya Dávid asked Lajos Bokros to lead
the EP elections list of MDF (02.24.). The former socialist minister of finance
is highly recognized by most of the proffession, however, his past and his
ideological position split the MDF extremely. The question is what will be the
potential balance of the pros and cons of the nomination.
The situation of Hungarian Romas gained more and more
visibility in the past months through the social system and due to several
crimes committed by or against Romas. In February two exceptional incidents had
ethnic relevance. In Veszprém a well known handball player was stabbed to death
by a group consisting of Romas (02. 28.), while in Tatárszentgyörgy a five year
old Roma child and his father was shot by unknown perpetrators (02. 23.).
Separately and together as well, much was said about public security and
Hungarian Romas. Following the incident in Veszprém Ferenc Gyurcsány promised
surpluss funding for the police, while the Fidesz proposed the 'three strikes
law' in parliament, aimed at the aggravation of the penal law (02. 12.).
Besides this the opposition party accused the cabinet of incompetence, saying
that public security is 'in shambles' as a result of their actions. The party -
in order to avoid the gain of the extreme right - had to react to the fact,
that the perpetrators were of Roma origin. Balancing between the needs of the
moderate and radical supporters, Viktor Orbán announced that (contrary to
Jobbik′s views) there is no such thing as Roma crime, but there are Roma
criminals and their numbers are rising (02. 11.). The socialists criticized the
head of the opposition vehemently because of this. (02. 14.). After the
double-murder in Tatárszentgyörgy, the Romas became the victims. The case held
the need for the improvement of public security on the agenda, and alongside it
the integration of Romas came into the limelight as well. Ernő Kállai, the
ombudsman for minority rights pressed for an ethnic 'peace plan' in his speech
in the parliament and called the political elite hypocrites for procrastinating
with finding a solution (02. 24.).
In February, Ferenc Gyurcsány was once again very active.
(Graph 3.) The PM represented the position of the MSZP in both questions as
well as taking his part in the criticism of the opposition. At the end of the
month the Prime Minister went to Brussels with crisis management plans, amongst
others a plan for a 180 billion euro stabilization and integration program for
Central Europe (03. 01.). Ibolya Dávid′s activity is worth mentionig as well:
the leader of the MDF made the news primarily as a result of Lajos Bokros′s
nomination. Ferenc Gyurcsány′s performance has been inconsistent in the past
months (Graph 4.). The Prime Minister did not set a new record considering the
number of his performances in the past cycle, however he approached the October
peak. Viktor Orbán′s values continue to stagnate at a low level.
Print article 