There is much uncertainty in the country. Your 72-hour ultimatum has expired, but the coalition has not fallen. They are unwilling to discuss the possibility of forming a government of experts with you or of dismissing Ferenc Gyurcsany, the prime minister. Indeed, they are confirming him in his post. What happens now?
The country is in a deep, moral, political and economic crisis, which a government led by Prime Minister Gyurcsany is incapable of leading us out of. Gyurcsany must go because he cannot hold the country hostage. He will obviously be strengthened by the confidence vote, but we think that public opinion will not accept the necessary cost-saving measures from this government. Managing this crisis will need consensus, and we have proposals for creating that consensus.
Many doubt that the demonstration on Kossuth ter has any purpose. They worry that things will get out of control, that there may be unexpected consequences if several hundred thousand people gather on the square while a confidence vote is taking place inside parliament. They think this Fidesz initiative is leading up a blind alley.
Why should we think that peaceful demonstrations pose a threat to democracy? There is no contradiction between parliamentary work and the freedom of expression - even in the form of a series of demonstrations on Kossuth ter. Citizens have the right to express their opinion, since they were deceived. Gyurcsany and the Socialist Party won power through lies and false promises.
As far as the electoral promises are concerned, Fidesz wasn't blameless. At the moment, it is nor clear how things will unfold. You want to see the establishment of a government of experts with a restricted mandate, while Tibor Navracsics, the leader of the Fidesz benches in Parliament, would be content to see the current coalition form a new government under a new leader. What is your proposal, exactly?
We're open to both versions. We think a government of experts would be a better solution. It would function as a kind of government of national unity with a limited time span and a limited mandate. You have to understand that we are in an unusual situation. Dealing with the crisis, cutting the deficit, kick starting the necessary reforms: these are more important than anything else. All parties would support this government, but only from the background. It wouldn't be a grand coalition, since this would require the parties to be directly represented in the government.
We would like to see the national round table re-established. The four key reforms - public administration, pension, education and health - could each be discussed at a separate round table by the best experts and specialist politicians. The other option is for the current coalition to nominate a new prime minister who would form a government. This would be a less effective solution, but it would be acceptable to us. Such a government would enjoy less broad-based support in society than a government of experts.
Let's say Gyurcsany leaves politics. Then, somehow, the Socialists and Fidesz would have to sit down and negotiate. Who would lead these talks, and whom would you nominate as prime minister? Istvan Stumpf has suggested Lajos Bokros. Would you accept him at the head of a government of experts or a coalition government? He has already proven his leadership skills.
We had reservations about the Bokros Package back in the day. As far as chairing the discussions is concerned, Laszlo Solyom, the president of the republic, or Szilveszter Vizi, the president of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, would both be appropriate. They could organise the reform round tables.
While the round-table experts were busy discussing reforms, the budget would get out of control. You can't sustain a deficit of more than 10 per cent indefinitely.
We do indeed need reforms. That's why we need support from society - and we haven't even mentioned the fact that, whatever the government claims, the reforms aren't even yielding returns, they're just taking money. They'll only start to have an effect in two or three years. The reforms need to be financed. Fidesz believes a so-called Hungarian Reform Fund should be established with the help of both foreign and domestic actors on the Hungarian economic stage. We have to reach an agreement with the owners of the biggest revenue streams. We have to make this legally binding, so that they pay the costs of reforms. The money that would come from them could only be used for that one purpose.
Press reports indicate you have already discussed this with local and foreign businesspeople. But we can't waste any time reaching a balanced budget. There's no avoiding tax hikes and spending cuts. Even you no longer talk about cutting taxes and contributions. With or without Gyurcsany, 2007 is going to be a year for spending cuts.
There is definitely a need for spending cuts. But I hope 2007 can also be a year for moral renewal, when politicians will win back the trust of society, when we can look together for solutions to the current crisis, when the experts of a government of national unity can devise reforms of the welfare system and of public administration.
In Brussels, international investors are worried that Fidesz will prevent the convergence programme from being implemented.
I have to tell people who are unaware of this that the programme is unimplementable as it stands. The government has signed up to something it cannot do. Pharmacists, doctors, university students, farmers and even policemen are promising an autumn of unrest. Other professions will join them. Unless we change and reform, the situation will remain unstable, and society will not make the necessary sacrifices if asked to do so by a government that has admitted it did not govern for several years and which lied continuously. Are people who hoped to join the Eurozone in 2006 or 2007 going to stand for this? No, they will not.
But Fidesz also voted for the Socialist Party's irresponsible 'bread and circuses' measures. Returning to Brussels, if things are so uncertain then we may not get the €23bn in subsidies we were hoping for, and many development plans will collapse.
In the EU, things don't work in quite the way our government claims. Brussels is open to crisis-management programmes. The convergence programme can and must be modified in quite a few respects. I know how people think over there, since I am vice-president of the European People's Party. As far as EU money is concerned, the problems are different. Brussels will not stand for state-appointed officials distributing money in counties and regions. They want to see locally elected representatives do this. What happens on the local level is repeated on the national level. The current prime minister has appointed a few people he trusts to distribute EU money, bypassing parliamentary oversight. I don't think the EU will accept this.
I'd like to reassure everyone who see hidden motives behind Fidesz's policies and who believe we are only trying to get Ferenc Gyurcsany dismissed because "we want to get into power at all costs and he is the only one who stands in our way" - that they are mistaken. We are a democratic party and we only wish to and only can govern if authorised to do so by parliamentary election. We believe the country is in a serious crisis which is getting deeper day by day, and we are looking for the way out of this crisis. In this situation, we need to establish a government based on compromises from all sides, one which will enjoy the confidence of all the parties and the whole of society.
Richárd Hirschler