Budapest, 15 December 2015
I am truly sorry that the Hungarian parliament has to debate this otherwise important issue in the midst of such verbal fisticuffs. And I am sorry that I will not have time to elaborate upon what I am going to say. Please do not take this as a personal insult, but our feeling is that the fight against anti-Semitism is greatly compromised by the fact that representatives of the successor party of another dictatorship regularly position themselves on the front line. This is the situation. And this is a problem, because at times like this there is a reflex reaction among the Hungarian people to call attention to the statues which were erected to honour those who served the communist dictatorship; and then instead of having a sensible discussion on the issues related to anti-Semitism, we have already lost our way.
The situation is that I am not shifting this responsibility onto anyone else. The facts are clear: there is a civil society organisation in Székesfehérvár which has decided that they want to erect such a statue. They submitted an application; you should be aware that this application did not reach the level of the highest decision-makers, and in this sense it is simply unfair to seek to discredit any Member of Parliament or any member of the Government. But regardless of whether this application reached that level or not, given that responsibility in government must be assumed on political grounds, the head of the ministry which is competent on the issue must assume the responsibility. But I have even worse news for myself, because it is the Prime Minister who must assume ultimate political responsibility for operation of the Government; and whichever way one looks at it, I am ultimately responsible for the grants given to this civil society organisation – even though otherwise I do not believe that I am personally culpable in this affair. But in any case that is irrelevant.
I am pleased that today the organisation in question cut this Gordian knot, and returned – or at least decided to return – the funds which it received from the Government, thereby removing the Government from the debate associated with the project. I wish to thank them for their decision.
We have respectfully listened to the opinion of the Honourable Member of Parliament, and with all due politeness I must say that we who sit on this side of the House believe that we are hardly in need of a lesson in principle-based politics, political courage and standing up for justice – especially not from the successor party of a former communist party. So much for the tone in which you sought to lecture us. I apologise for having to say this to a lady, but I am compelled to say this here, because it is a matter of honour.
Since you have asked me – and it is quite a task to state my opinion on this historical question in just twenty seconds – my personal view is rather simple, because the Hungarian prime minister takes his oath of office on the Constitution. In this respect the Constitution lays down two facts. The first is that citizens have the right to establish organisations, to organise themselves and to make independent decisions; and the Prime Minister cannot – and indeed shall not – deprive them of this right.
Secondly, I do not support the erection of such a statue. Neither, therefore, shall I personally support erection of a statue in honour of Miklós Horthy, who was a political leader in a period which is clearly defined in the Hungarian Constitution as one during which Hungary lost its national sovereignty. On 19 March 1944 we lost our sovereignty, and on 2 May 1990 we regained it. We were an occupied country between those two dates. Naturally there may be various reasons for collaboration with the occupying powers, and different depths and features of collaboration; I do not wish to go into those aspects. I will merely establish the fact that the Government cannot support the erection of a statue in honour of a politician who collaborated with occupying powers and collaborated with oppressors of Hungary – whatever merits that politician may otherwise have had. Thank you for your attention.