In June, none of the many issues that have arisen could dominate the headlines. Since the formation of the minority government, the MSZP has been pursuing ‘safety-first’ politics, and after the referendum in March, the Fidesz has also restrained its attacks; as a result, a sort of status quo has taken shape. The SZDSZ has elected Gábor Fodor as chairman, who had a strong start at the head of the liberal party. However, he may be hampered by the fact that his rival, János Kóka, is still leading the party’s parliamentary group.
By May 2008, the first half of the parliamentary term – hallmarked by the Prime Minister’s controversial speech in Balatonőszöd, the healthcare reform and the referendum initiated by the Fidesz – has come to an end. The formation of the minority government has brought some novelty to Hungarian politics, but at the same time, the parties’ behaviour has become increasingly reminiscent of the period before the 2006 elections. The MSZP seems intent on avoiding measures that could hurt larger sub-groups of society; another feature of its ‘safety-first’ politics is a more conscious approach to communication. The Fidesz has not launched a major attack against the socialists ever since the referendum’s landslide victory: the opposition party attempts to build on minor issues, and its primary target is not the government’s legitimacy any more. The SZDSZ has hoped to leave behind the scandals and infightings that have plagued the liberal party since February at the internal elections on the 7th. As expected, Gábor Fodor was elected chairman, albeit by a surprisingly narrow margin – he then expressed his intention of starting a dialogue both within the SZDSZ and with the rival political forces. Parts of the June agenda were two issues – the future of social allowances and plans for a tax reform – that were widely discussed by the civil sphere, in addition to party politics. Overall, the ratios of both the government and the opposition topics have decreased; as the former did so more than the latter, the two values are almost identical (Graph 1). Interestingly, the two sides had similar results last year, in the beginning of the summer break. The parties’ level of activity has somewhat dropped; the only exception is the SZDSZ, which, after the high of April and the low of May, has again performed around its average (Graph 2).
Because of the referendum and the breaking-up of the coalition, it is only in May that Ferenc Gyurcsány could begin implementing the political changes that he had outlined in February. In many ways, the two months since the formation of the minority government have followed the pattern of the second half of the previous parliamentary term. The MSZP has apparently given up its more ambitious plans, and is instead trying to avoid conflicts, emphasizing the importance of having extensive talks before making a decision. The Ministries of Health and Economy, hitherto in the thick of political struggles, are led by politicians (Tamás Székely and Gordon Bajnai) who are not seen as controversial, and usually appear in the news in a positive context. An additional similarity to the previous term is that the socialists attack the Fidesz through party leader Viktor Orbán – they have kept his speech – leaked in the end of May – on the agenda for more than a week (26. and 30. 05., 01., 02. and 05. 06.). It is not clear whether the socialists’ return to ‘velvet’ politics was a strategic choice or a psychological need. It could have had a rational basis, as by undoing the causes of their unpopularity, with the realization of projects co-financed by the European Union and a couple of unforeseen successes, they may lay the foundation of a decent electoral showing by 2010. Examples for such successes were the announcement that a new Mercedes factory would be built in Hungary (Kecskemét) (18. 06.), and that Budapest was chosen to be the headquarters of the European Institute of Innovation and Technology (18. 06.).
Like the socialists, the Fidesz also seems to have reverted to its pre-2006 politics. After the PM’s Balatonőszöd speech and the protracted and occasionally violent anti-government protests in autumn 2006, the opposition party started to question more than the cabinet’s honesty and competence: its very legitimacy. Although the probability of having early elections has gradually diminished, the Fidesz – and especially Viktor Orbán – could always point out the next step that was needed in order to make the government fall. This was true until the referendum on March 9th. After its huge victory, the Fidesz bided its time, but – despite the split of the coalition – the government could steady its position. Having no direct means to topple Ferenc Gyurcsány, the opposition party’s politics became less focused: in June, it opened several short-lived fronts in minor issues. For example, Fidesz politicians criticized the cabinet for the costs of the Prime Minister’s visit to Sarajevo (14. 06.), the new internet site of the government spokespeople (kormányszóvivő.hu) (15. and 26. 06.) and the repainting of an armour-plated car (22. 06.). Such attacks are in no way apt for reshaping the political power relations; true that the Fidesz, enjoying a commanding lead over its rival, does not necessarily have that in mind. Perhaps the only issue that drew the attention of a broader public was the tactical battle around energy prices. The Ministry of Economy announced the increase of gas prices on May 30th, a decision that was denounced by the Fidesz several times (28., 30. and 31. 05.), and led Viktor Orbán to urge a long-term gas strategy. In the second half of the month, Ferenc Gyurcsány spoke about the need to reconsider the system of allowances with regard to the high prices, and the idea of a special tax (named after Robin Hood) was brought up (19. and 20. 06.). The largest opposition party urged immediate action (19. and 24. 06.). In the end of June, both the MSZP and the Fidesz-ally KDNP suggested a radical cut in the VAT of district heat (24., 26. and 27. 06.). Apparently, the two political sides have returned to their habit of trying to influence people through their wallets.
The SZDSZ held its extraordinary congress, where Gábor Fodor was elected chairman, defeating János Kóka by two votes. This probably means the conclusion of the crisis affecting the free democrats since February; although a local politician reported new irregularities (11. 06.), his accusations did not cause much of a stir. After the internal elections, most of the news concerning the SZDSZ were about personally Gábor Fodor, mainly in two contexts. In his victory speech, he announced that he would seek dialogue with his intra-party rivals as well as with the other parliamentary parties. While previously, the MDF intended to appear as a centre party by distancing itself from both the MSZP and the Fidesz, the liberals – at least so they claim – are opening up to both sides. To show its independence from the government, the SZDSZ has turned down the cabinet’s replies to several interpellations (02. and 09. 06.). Gábor Fodor’s room for manoeuvre is increased by the fact that the votes of liberal MPs are necessary for the MSZP (to pass the budget), and would come in handy for the Fidesz (to force early elections). Although at present, the SZDSZ is not popular enough to be interested in the fall of the government, Viktor Orbán himself proposed a meeting to the new leader of the free democrats (09. 06.). One of his aims was probably to test publicly whether the SZDSZ could be considered a true opposition party. However, the meeting went more according to Gábor Fodor’s plans, who – like later in the month with Ferenc Gyurcsány – suggested to focus on concrete policies (13. and 24. 06.).
It remains a question for the following months how much the SZDSZ wants and is able to manoeuvre between the two large parties, and whether this strategy will yield results. The MDF’s only enjoyed moderate success – there was no breakthrough in the conservative party’s support –, but an advantage of opening up over keeping the distance is that it may lead to a better bargaining position. It seems certain that Gábor Fodor wishes to build on his personal appeal: he would like his name to become a sort of ‘brand’ – something that would not be unprecedented in modern politics. He has a reasonable chance of achieving that, as he was less involved in the political struggles since 1990 than many of his fellow free democrats, and – in spite of the short spells he spent as a minister – he is less connected with the MSZP. The SZDSZ would probably need more than that to reverse its decline – a thought-out and convincingly presented program, or even a well-chosen ideological message –, but in any case, Gábor Fodor’ person could be a good base to build on. The ‘personalization’ of politics could also strengthen the new chairman’s position within the SZDSZ. He would need that: in addition to the dialogue initiated with the large parties, the other news about the free democrats was that (for now) János Kóka has remained leader of the party’s parliamentary group. Although so far in the history of the SZDSZ, the head of the parliamentary group has always been either the chairman or a candidate of his, this time, the MPs did not ask for a change (09. and 25. 06.), as opposed to several liberal politicians, including the Mayor of Budapest, Gábor Demszky (23. 06.). As at present, the importance of the SZDSZ lays in its votes in the Parliament, two centres of power may form within the party, which, besides possibly deepening the gap between the two sides, may hamper Gábor Fodor’s efforts.
In June, many different politicians had their share of the agenda, but most of them only recorded a few appearances (Graph 3). This implies – as suggested above – that in the sixth month of the year, several issues have come up, but none of them became dominant news. Gábor Fodor is one of the few protagonists: he has never had so many appearances in a single month. His outstanding result is chiefly due to the interest his fellow politicians and the media have displayed towards him after his election – it would be surprising if he could repeat it in the future. Ferenc Gyurcsány was active, too: the Prime Minister has voiced his opinion in most issues, which could be a sign of him needing to spend less energy on strengthening his position within the MSZP (Graph 4). Viktor Orbán had an average month: besides his usual topics (early elections, new deals with various strata of the society), the leader of the opposition has devoted considerable time to the matter of energy prices.
Print article 