Quantcast
Channel: corruption – Hungarian Spectrum
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 75

Can the European Commission use leverage against the Orbán government?

$
0
0

A quick look at the international press reveals that a number of countries — Italy, Romania, and Spain, among others — are working on the plans they have to submit to the European Commission before they can receive their allotted portion of the Recovery and Resilience Funds (RRF).

If negotiations are currently underway between the Commission and Budapest regarding details of the RRF, the Hungarian people certainly don’t know anything about them. The Orbán government doesn’t like to share information with the country’s citizens in general, and it especially loathes revealing anything that might cloud the rosy announcements the government promulgates on all possible occasions.

That’s why an exclusive from Reuters sent shockwaves in the world of Hungarian politics and the media. Reuters claimed that the Hungarian government was told “to reform its public procurement laws to curb systemic fraud” before it could receive the fabulous amount of recovery funds to which Hungary is entitled. Moreover, the author of the exclusive claimed that the document, dated January 26, was seen by the staff of the agency. It calls, the article claims, for “improved data transparency and accessibility.” There was no immediate response from the Hungarian government to a request for comment.

A few hours later, another Reuters article appeared on the same subject, giving more details about the contents of the letter allegedly sent to Budapest. It included the following paragraph: “The Commission has been demanding better analysis and control of public procurement risks for many years. At the same time, there seems to be resistance at the highest level of politics.”

Monday night, Erik Bánki (Fidesz), chairman of the parliamentary committee on the economy, more or less admitted that in the last three years the Orbán government has had disagreements with the European Union over the country’s procurement practices. He argued, however, that the perception of corrupt practices is due to the Orbán government’s unstinting transparency in its public reporting of procurement cases, a comment that is widely disputed by the general public.

The next morning, Gergely Gulyás, Viktor Orbán’s chief-of-staff, called the Reuters information fake news because “the government did not receive any formal or informal requests from the European Union on any procurement case.” On the other hand, he gave details about the current negotiations over the RRF and the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF). The Orbán government insists that “the transparency of public procurement procedures is outstanding, with 98% of public procurements openly available. The number of unpublished procurement procedures has fallen from 3,600 to 274 in the last six years.” We should, however, note that ATV recently reported that between 2015 and 2019 Hungary spent 4% of EU resources in contravention of regulations while the EU average was 0.36% and the second worst country was Slovakia, with 0.53%.

It is likely that the document the Reuters staff saw was a draft that may be an answer to the 13-page outline which, according to HVG’s Eurológus, Hungary had already submitted as its proposal for the use of the RRF resources. He was also told by one of the spokesmen of the European Commission that “the national development plans should address the relevant country-specific recommendations, strengthen growth potential and the economic, institutional, and social resilience of the member state as a condition for granting aid.” Therefore, it is possible that, just like Romania, Hungary will have to revise its original plan.

Sensing trouble ahead, the government media set out to explain who is really responsible for the European Union’s “unfounded charge” of corruption. Within the vast array of Fidesz propaganda is a blog that publishes articles from members of the Firewall Group, about whom we know nothing, but on whom Magyar Nemzet and other Fidesz publications often rely. According to this decidedly far-right blog, it is Transparency International, financed by George Soros, that is responsible for this latest attack on the Orbán government by those EU commissioners who are partially kept by the billionaire. He is the conductor of the anti-Hungarian orchestra. The truth is that Open Society Foundations’ contribution to Transparency International is just a fraction of its total budget.

This primitive article on this obscure website was immediately republished by Híradó, the main vehicle of MTVA (Media Service Support and Asset Management Fund), which supplies the “proper interpretation” of news to television and radio stations. Here the government media service accuses the Hungarian section of Transparency International of falsification of data in the report the office published on January 23. In it, the organization claimed that Hungary is the second most corrupt country in the European Union.

Gergely Gulyás is most likely correct that the Orbán government hasn’t received an official answer to its proposals about the way in which it plans to spend the money it will receive from the RRF package. But Budapest must realize that “the European Commission has a clear message for EU capitals in ongoing talks on the content of their recovery plans: unless you tackle some long-standing structural issues and commit to significant reforms, the money won’t flow.”

According to a recent article in Politico, EU Budget Commissioner Johannes Hahn said last month that “we need a better balance between reforms and investments.” If this remains the European Commission’s aim, Orbán will be in considerable trouble. He loves “investment,” especially when it benefits him and his friends, but his zeal for reform is sorely wanting. He knows from watching earlier governments’ efforts that reforms are often accompanied by the more stringent allocation of resources and/or by the population’s aversion to anything new and different.

The proposals are due by April 30, and the Commission will have two months to evaluate them. The final word is that of the Commission, and therefore it has a lot of leverage in these talks. The results might be known by the end of June.

February 9, 2021

Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 75

Trending Articles