Károly Szita: My Dear Friends, Ladies and Gentlemen, we haven’t seen anything yet, but now we will – something different. First of all, before I give the floor… No, I won’t “give” – how dare I presume such a thing? Before I invite the Prime Minister to say a few words about us as well, I’d like to draw your attention to the fact that there are a lot of us here in this hall. This arena was built for a little purpose, and tomorrow we’ll be playing a major basketball match against Alba Fehérvár. I just wanted to say this because you’ll be cheering them on, and I’ll be cheering us on; but together we’ll win. Welcome among us, Prime Minister!
Good afternoon to everyone! I don’t know what the result of the Kaposvár–Fehérvár basketball match will be, but I do know that in the end, we’re all Hungarians.
Absolutely!
Thank you very much for having me here. I also thank Károly very much for taking on the organisation of this gathering. I arrived on the Davos–Kaposvár flight, with a detour via Brussels; so I can give you a first-hand account of what’s happening today in the wider world, and what affects us. I’m very grateful to Károly for his long-standing friendship. I thank the people of Kaposvár for their solidarity and camaraderie, which I’ve experienced throughout my life. Kaposvár has always supported us – and me personally as well. Thank you for every kind word, encouragement, slap on the back and prayer. Thank you for your votes, and thank you very much for your support. We in the Government have always tried to repay this. I can say that this is an old friendship between Kaposvár and our political community, Fidesz – characterised by the fact that we’ve never become bored with each other. But it’s a long story.
I checked on this: I first came here in 1989, in May. Back then I came to convince you that the moment had come to send away the communists and force the Soviets back home. That was my short speech in May 1989. There was a communist system, and the Soviets were here. It was a samizdat-distribution meeting. There are young people here, whom I saw earlier, and many of them don’t know what samizdat was. How could they? Samizdat described a document that had to be distributed secretly, because otherwise the authorities would confiscate it. Its origin is suspicious and uncertain – like the Tisza Party’s programme; as for the latter, no one really knows what the truth is, only that something’s happening. We met at the Kilián Cultural Centre. Then I went to the theatre here; in the 1990s, if you remember, it was fashionable to come from Budapest to Kaposvár for the theatre. I used to come here too, I saw many fine performances, and one memorable clash comes to mind. This happened in January 1994, when I ran into the SZDSZ [opposition Free Democratic Alliance] politician István Eörsi in the theatre buffet, and we exchanged mutual insults. He insulted us by saying we didn’t hate the MDF [the then ruling party] enough – this was before the 1994 election. And we needled them by saying that behind the scenes they’d entered into a secret alliance with the communists, which would lead to an SZDSZ–MSZP coalition. And that’s exactly what happened! The point is that our mutual insults ended in a duel at the buffet. The weapon of choice was pálinka, the unit of measure half a decilitre. István Eörsi has passed away – may he rest in peace. I can say that I won, although I don’t remember it like that myself: eyewitnesses claim it happened that way. And while we were duelling inside, a metre of snow fell in Kaposvár – you may remember January 1994. I was stuck here for two days, and Károly put us up in his house. My wife, who was eight months pregnant, voiced her frank opinion about what had happened at the buffet – but that’s not relevant here.
And ultimately I was able to talk with Károly for two full days about how this would unfold – this story called “Kaposvár”, the place that’s yours. I asked Károly, “How will Kaposvár become a viable, modern city? Because you’re oddly positioned on the map too. It’s not clear that you’re the centre of “Somogyland”, but how big are you? Sixty thousand, right? And not far from you is a magnet called Pécs – a large city that draws everything away. Meanwhile Budapest is growing. So how will Kaposvár become a real Hungarian city, offering a quality of life and safety? How will it be urban, but still provincial?” And, as I recall, Károly said the following: “First, connect us up.” He was talking about roads. Somogy County shouldn’t be at the world’s end: people should be able to come here, and people here should also be able to reach any part of the country quickly. He said that there needed to be a university – the college shouldn’t be taken away, but it should be turned into a university. And although it was integrated into Gödöllő, it should remain here and be an independent university. Thirty per cent of students graduating here actually stay – that’s a very high average in international terms! Thirty per cent of students graduating in a provincial city staying in the area! Károly told me not to forget the hospital. The hospital! I recommend that everyone pays attention to the debate about this. Tisza has proposed the creation of seven large regional hospitals. This would mean yours would be downgraded – or at least reclassified. Perhaps János Lázár has mentioned this too, and he puts this case the most strongly, but our programme states that every county seat must have a strong county hospital, which will provide healthcare for people living in that county. This is your future. Károly has also said that this is a cultural city, and there must be something outstanding, there must be culture of high quality. He said this: “theatre”. We followed up on that: we renovated the theatre – not only preserving it, but upgrading it. And Károly said that the most important thing is the industrial park. There’s a sugar factory here – now it’s in Austrian hands, but it’s the last sugar factory in Hungary, and it must be preserved. An industrial park must be created, and investments are needed. Under the Fidesz government, 100 billion forints’ worth of investment came to the Kaposvár industrial park – because that creates jobs, and only that can keep young people here. Károly said – this was much later, about twenty years on, as our first meeting was thirty-seven years ago – that you have Életfa Park, and I must go there. He invited me there, where we planted a tree in Életfa Park to celebrate a newborn. I think this is one of the most beautiful inventions or symbols that any mayor has come up with in a city since the fall of communism.
Now perhaps Károly will allow me to also thank Márta Mátrai, who was our parliamentary group director and our quaestor. Perhaps I can be forgiven for the fact that when I hear the word “Kaposvár”, it’s not Károly who comes to mind, but her. And when she passes me in the corridor in Parliament, the same word always comes to mind: “impeccable”. We thank Márta for her work!
I also need to speak briefly about our bishop “Father Beton”, whom I warmly greet. First of all, he has always looked with indulgence on the immutable fact that I am, after all, a Calvinist. He has never withheld from me his paternal advice; in one of our conversations about politics he said that national governance is a beautiful thing, but it must be based on Christian principles. In 2010 we created a national, Christian constitution. And when someone writes about this period of more than a decade, I think the first thing they’ll mention will be this, as the greatest achievement: after the twenty turbulent years following the fall of communism, we didn’t know precisely – or at least couldn’t read from the Constitution – who we were, what our purpose was, why we were in the world, what mission Hungarians had to fulfil or serve in their lives; in other words, what Hungarian life should be – but the Constitution adopted in 2011 provides clear answers to these questions. I remind everyone that it was signed by the President of the Republic on Easter Sunday. This is the Easter Constitution, which tells Hungarians what their role in the world is. I’m certain that “Father Beton” is also satisfied with the constitutional amendments which were later required to confirm that a father is a man and a mother is a woman. Previously everyone knew this, but then it had to be written into the Constitution. So we have a Christian and national constitution, solid and secure, differing from the politics of all other European countries. I thank everyone who contributed to its creation – even with a single piece of good advice, like our bishop.
So that’s where we stand, Ladies and Gentlemen. Kaposvár has always been able to count on the Government, and we can always count on Kaposvár. Thank you for these thirty-seven years!
Thank you very much, Prime Minister. Now it’s our turn; so far everything has been exciting, but another exciting part is coming, when I’ll hand over the floor to you so that you can ask questions. I’m just a decorative bauble here, Prime Minister – you’re the main character. Please ask questions, and give the Prime Minister the opportunity to answer.
At the start, Károly, you can’t really tell who’s more important. Once I captained Fidesz’s football team in a match against a journalists’ team. Handshake in the centre circle, when the journalists’ captain says to me: “It doesn’t matter what the result is – it will be what I write anyway.” Károly, we’ll see…
Right at the start, I want to apologise to you, to all of you: Philip Rákay impressed upon me that I must always keep an eye on that clock over there. When it reaches 60:00, I should somehow manage to thank everyone for their questions with great respect, and thank the Prime Minister for his answers. But it’ll be hard for me to do that if he keeps saying something. Forgive me, Philip, I’ll try – I promise you.
“I’ll say it to my daughter so that my daughter-in-law hears it too, I’ll tell you so that he overhears.” Well, I understand, of course…
Now, Ladies and Gentlemen, I respectfully hand over the floor to you. We agreed with the Prime Minister that I’d collect three questions. The Prime Minister will then give his opinion on those three questions, and after that we’ll have another round. So, who will be the first questioner? I’m looking around; up there a lady is waving both hands very energetically. I’d ask my colleagues for help to somehow get a microphone to her.
Rózsa Járfás: Thank you very much. “Wine, wheat, peace!” I’m Rózsa Járfás, an entrepreneur from Kaposvár. I come from a long-established rural farming family in Somogy. Part of my family still works in agriculture. Many of my friends and acquaintances are farmers – like most people in Somogy. I’ve come with the message to thank the Prime Minister and the Government for the immense support given to farmers in recent years, which is allowing them to make bold plans. They have faith, hope, and very serious goals for the future. But the events of the past week have caused farmers serious concern. As the Prime Minister often says, the Brusselites are sitting backwards on their horses: they want to let in all kinds of – I’ll use this word – rubbish into Europe; and they want to force us to buy these products. Farmers are asking what will happen to their crops if the free trade agreement comes into effect, if Ukrainian grain comes into the country. My question to the Prime Minister is this: Is there a back door that will allow farmers to continue planning? Even in our prayers, we Hungarians say, “Give us this day our daily bread.” Prime Minister, on behalf of farmers, I ask for your and your government’s help. Thank you very much!
Szita Károly: Thank you very much. My dear friends, before I continue, on behalf of the Prime Minister I thank everyone for their questions. But so that as many questioners as possible get the chance to ask, I’d like to respectfully ask everyone to fit their question into one minute. Please go ahead! Please wait a moment, my colleagues will help, they’ll take the microphone there. I’ll try to go by sector; I can’t see everywhere, so please forgive me for not being able to give everyone the floor. Please go ahead!
Margit Kaposvölgyiné Hangyel: I’m Margit Kaposvölgyiné, and I’m retired. I have four grandchildren. We’ve been very happy with the energy price cap and the energy price reductions, but personally I’m worried that if energy prices keep rising because of the war, this whole system won’t be sustainable. Prime Minister, can you offer any encouraging news on this?
Károly Szita: Thank you very much. I’ll turn around. Please go ahead, back there. Colleagues, help her. They’ve raised their hands, it’s very difficult. Yes, go ahead!
Sándor Kecskeméti: Good afternoon, I’m Sándor Kecskeméti, and I live in Somogy County. At the moment the Ukrainian front is far away, and I want it to stay that way. I’d only fight for my own homeland and my family. I won’t fight for Ukraine, and I won’t fight for a Ukrainian man preaching in a green sweater. What message do you have for the people of Somogy County? What’s happening in Ukraine right now?
Károly Szita: Thank you very much for the question. Prime Minister, please go ahead.
Each question could take a whole morning or afternoon to answer. Let’s start with the farmers. If we approach this question from a distance, why do we insist on preserving Hungarian villages, why do we need Hungarian farmers, why do we need Hungarian agriculture? When I look around the world, I have to say that everywhere I see artificial things multiplying, and humanity moving away from its true, natural environment. Everything now is made of plastic: they even want to feed us artificial meat, and intelligence is becoming artificial. Yet we’re not doing so well even with the natural things – which perhaps we should focus on developing. So everything somehow… People’s civilisational perception is that things are moving away from us, becoming ever more artificial; and even if city life is becoming more comfortable, the village, our direct connection to nature, the land, cultivating the land, with something growing from nothing or from a seed – all of these are experiences, essential parts of human life that must be preserved. This is why villages must definitely be preserved. In this, Somogy County has a huge responsibility. Looking at the data, of all our counties, Somogy has the most villages – over 270, if I remember correctly. So Somogy has both the responsibility and the opportunity to keep Hungarians on the land, to prevent them losing their connection with reality – and in this artificial world, ultimately with themselves. That’s the first dimension. The second is the material sphere. Hungary is a country with an agricultural sector capable of feeding twenty million people. So if we cultivate all our arable land and perform well on average, we can sustain twenty million people. This means ourselves and another ten million. That’s the produce we can sell. Hungarian agriculture is a very important pillar of the Hungarian economy – not just for the symbolic and civilisational reasons I mentioned earlier, but also for the money it brings in. We produce enough food for ten million people which we can sell elsewhere. Now, here’s where the problem starts. This is the problem with Hungarian agriculture. All over the world there’s a fight between traders and producers. What are we really talking about when we discuss what you’ve mentioned – Mercosur bringing cheap food in from South America, and bringing cheap food in from Ukraine? It’s about ten million Hungarians consuming imports. Who benefits from imports? The traders! Actually, this is also a covert war between traders and producers. If you can protect Hungarian agriculture, you’ll protect your producers; if you don’t, you’ll hand over the consumption of ten million people and its financial power to importers, to the traders. This is why Hungarian sovereignty also hinges on having a Hungarian countryside, villages, and Hungarian agriculture. Now, is there a back door? There’s a back door if you break one open with a big mace. Otherwise, there isn’t: you have to create the back door.
Károly will scold me, but here a covert war over European constitutional law is underway. You see, if the European Union signs an agreement, say about importing South American food into Europe, then within the current European constitutional framework every country must vote on it in its national parliament: it must be ratified. No one can take this right from us. How do they take this right away? They’ve invented a law, in complete contravention of the EU constitutional order, which says that the foregoing is true, but until that happens, the Commission – meaning Mrs. von der Leyen – can provisionally enact the agreement, which we didn’t approve. That’s what’s happened, that’s what the debate is about, this is the battle. Because the Commission wants to temporarily enact an agreement that not only won’t be approved by us, but won’t be approved by other countries either. Such hidden battles are happening in Brussels. I think that if the farmers stand up for themselves, the Brussels politicians won’t be as brave as they appear to be in press conferences; when farmers gather, the politicians usually step back. We need pan-European solidarity among farmers, and then I think European farmers can be saved. Regarding Hungarian agriculture, and I heard János Lázár also spoke about this, I have to say that Hungarian agriculture has developed a lot over the past fifteen years: according to the data its efficiency has increased, and since 2010 we’ve recorded a 53 per cent increase in productivity. Today we’re the seventh most productive agricultural country in the European Union. Not bad out of twenty-seven, but I think we shouldn’t stop until we reach the medal-winners’ podium: we must be among the top three. After 2026 we’ll mobilise a lot of resources for this. Don’t forget that Brussels is the farmers’ adversary! Brussels is the farmers’ adversary: von der Leyen and Mr. Weber, who leads the European People’s Party. Mr. Zelenskyy too, because he wants to send low-quality Ukrainian food here. And the leader of the Tisza Party is also part of this package. They’re selling these in a package: if you buy Tisza, you’ll also get a von der Leyen, a Weber and a Zelenskyy: “Here’s a hump to match your limp!” Well, that’s enough about agriculture.
As for energy bills, this is an issue that touches on very deep philosophical questions; because it’s undeniable that when we introduced the reductions in household energy bills, we effectively separated household energy prices from what you might call “natural” market processes. This means that Hungarians pay less for energy than they would if they had to buy it directly from the market without any state regulation. There’s a big debate about whether it’s permissible to do such a thing. In my view, this shouldn’t be derived from theory but from reality. And if I look at what’s happening in Western Europe today, where there are no energy price reductions, I see that citizens and families similar to you are paying two to three times more for their energy bills than you do. This is the question that must be asked: Could Hungarian families bear this? Everyone should think about having a monthly gas bill of between thirty and forty thousand forints, multiply it by three, and then reflect on the consequences if there were no price reductions. The poorer you are, the more you’d be flattened by a high energy price. This is why the Hungarian government decided to treat energy bills as a matter that must be regulated collectively, nationwide; and so we established a system of reductions in energy bills. How do we do this? We do it by taking a portion of the profits from those making large amounts of money in the energy sector and distributing it among the people as energy subsidies. Put simply, this is the situation. At first glance it seems very simple, but if we didn’t take a large part of MOL’s profits, say, MOL would be a more successful company. Or if we didn’t take a portion of MVM’s profits and redistribute it, that company would be more successful. So everything comes at a price. This means that profits in the Hungarian energy sector can’t reach the levels seen in the West. Now, there’s this fine new person on Tisza’s side, this corporate person named Kapitány, who used to work at Shell. I looked up what happened in 2022–23, when energy prices suddenly soared because of the war. Before the price increase Shell had an annual profit of 19 billion, and in one year it had risen to 40 billion. That was the increase that we took and gave to the people, so that they wouldn’t have to bear the cost of the dramatic, unbearable changes in the energy market. So what I want to say is that the reductions in household energy bills are a very complicated matter, and very difficult to maintain; but I’m convinced that in Hungary it has become a public good. The reductions in household energy bills must be seen as a service provided by the Hungarian state; and as long as there’s a national government, this is how it will remain. We must know, we must be aware, that our opponents want to abolish them. We regularly receive written demands from Brussels to abolish the price reductions. And Brussels-backed Hungarian politicians do the same. The Tisza Party also says that the price reductions are humbug. Well, perhaps they’re humbug in [the wealthy Budapest district of] Rózsadomb – but not necessarily in outer Kaposvár, where I think they’re important. So one dimension of the election is that if the national government remains, the energy price reductions will remain, and if a Brussels-aligned government is elected, the energy price reductions will be finished. The question is what we want to do in the long term. In addition to gas, electricity is also important, and here we have room to manoeuvre. One of the major goals is for Hungary to achieve energy independence. This can be achieved in the following steps. First we’ll build Paks II [nuclear power plant extension], because that’s the cheapest energy available. Then we’ll extend the operating life of Paks I. Together, these two can supply about 65–66 per cent of Hungary’s electricity demand. We’ll continue developing solar panels, now adding batteries for companies and households, and this can provide about 20 per cent, leaving only about 10 per cent to be provided by gas. And since we don’t have our own gas fields, meanwhile we’re quietly and slyly buying them around the world. I don’t know if you’re aware, for example, that Hungary has a gas field in Azerbaijan. And so, if we carry this through, by the end of the next term in government Hungary will be a country capable of producing enough of its own electricity to meet its domestic demand. That’s all I have to say on energy and the reductions in energy bills. So those who asked whether it’s sustainable shouldn’t worry. Of course it’s not inherently sustainable, but we’re capable of maintaining it. Essentially, that’s the short answer.
Ukraine. Before I answer the question about how it threatens us, how it will enter Hungarian life if permitted, I’ll briefly discuss what’s happening in Ukraine from a broader perspective. I suggest we mentally travel back to 1990: the Soviets leave, Hungary exits the Warsaw Pact, and it joins NATO in 1999. Between these two events eight to nine years passed, during which Hungary was effectively a buffer zone between the Western world and the Russian world. We succeeded in joining NATO, which removed Hungary from the buffer zone and made it part of the Western security system. The edge of the Western security system is at Hungary’s eastern borders, where Ukraine begins. And so Ukraine became the area between the Russian world, the Russian army, and the Western world. This was its status for about thirty years. The fate of such buffer zones is that the powers between which they’re situated will exert influence over them. In a continuous, conflict-laden manner, the Western world had about 50 per cent influence over Ukraine, and the Russian world had about 50 per cent influence. That was Ukraine. Then a decision was made. The Westerners, the Americans and the Ukrainians collectively decided that this would end, and they’d no longer be a buffer zone but join the Western security system, as we had done. But the consequence was that the Russians saw NATO arriving right on Russia’s borders and said, “No!” Ukraine may have the right to join whatever it wishes, but Russia sees itself as having the right to prevent a hostile army from coming to its borders. And they declared, “If you go ahead, if you insist on Ukraine’s NATO membership, there will be war.” And so it happened. Ukraine and the Americans, Europe, the West, insisted on Ukraine joining NATO, and the Russians insisted that it couldn’t happen. And from this situation, the war began. Of course in the Western version of events it’s as if a little Pac-Man came from the East and gobbled up poor Ukraine. I’m not ruling out the possibility that the Russians have various territorial ambitions; we can’t read anyone’s mind, especially not the minds of KGB-trained people – and trying to do so is impossible. But what we do know are the facts. And I see no solution other than accepting that NATO and the EU can’t be directly on Russia’s borders, because the Russians will always react with war. This is why there must always be some kind of buffer zone between Russia and the West – which includes Hungary – along Hungary’s eastern borders. And we should agree that this land, which we call Ukraine, which was a buffer zone and has now become a war zone, must once more become a buffer state: a peaceful country in a unique position, capable of development, subject to influences from its left and its right, incorporating these into its policies. This is achievable. If it doesn’t happen, the alternative is continuous war. Many of us here have been married for some time – my marriage is approaching forty. And in marriage, one learns that sometimes peace and harmony are more important than justice. This is the situation here. So I suggest that, in this conflict, we shouldn’t seek justice, but rather consider how to achieve peace and reduce the dangers – which are serious – to the lowest possible level. This is the broader context. When you hear news reports from here and there about security guarantees, place them in this context; it’s then that you can situate the daily news, and everything becomes understandable – even if at first glance it doesn’t seem obvious from the news flow.
Hungary. The situation is that, as I mentioned, I came here from a meeting in Brussels; it was a council of war. So in Brussels today we don’t have prime ministerial summits, but councils of war! The leaders of the European Union have decided that Russia will be defeated in a war on the Ukrainian front. There’s been a decision on this! You may have seen the briefings before I arrived here: “Whatever it takes”, and “For as long as necessary”. Weapons, money – and now there’s even a signed agreement that, if necessary, soldiers will be sent to Ukraine. So Europe isn’t going to war – it has already gone to war. The only question is how quickly the effects will reach our lives. The greatest danger is that our children will be conscripted. The greatest danger is that young Hungarian people will suddenly find themselves in uniform, standing on Ukrainian soil. We’ve already found ourselves standing in uniform on Ukrainian soil. Perhaps our most beautiful military song is precisely about Somogy County: the song on a Tamás Cseh record about a mother from Somogy longing for her husband. In the Second World War many young people from Somogy were taken as soldiers; and we don’t want to see a European situation in which a government in Hungary – instead of advocating staying out of the war – thinks that we must enter it as well, simply because the Westerners are going in: wanting to moving in step with the West, instead of wanting to staying out. If in matters of war we act in parallel with Western Europeans, our young people will find themselves on Ukrainian territory, involved in a war. And who will come back? That story is told in the documents of the two world wars!
So the first thing is to protect our young people: to not allow such a political change in Hungary. To put it plainly: to not allow a Tisza government to take Hungary down a Brusselite path that ends with our children being sent to war. The second issue is money. Let’s not be embarrassed about speaking about money. War requires money. The European Union has decided to wage war, but it has no money. What will it do? It can obtain funds from two sources: one, from the Member States; the other, from borrowing. You can hear all sorts of numbers. The figures that I have show that so far we’ve sent 195 billion euros from Europe to Ukraine. And they’ve decided to send an additional 90 billion euros. The Union has no money – it’s borrowed the money and given it to the Ukrainians, in order for them to repay later. Well, let Tisza win the election and see how the Ukrainians repay the loan! It’s 90 billion euros! And on Thursday evening they distributed a document among us, a copy of which I’ve brought here for you. It’s a completely new, unpublished document, which was leaked yesterday to Politico; perhaps I shouldn’t even be showing it here. It’s a plan for how much money the Union wants to give to Ukraine. This is a European Commission document. This is no longer about what we think here in Budapest, or clever planning: exactly what will happen is in writing. I won’t read it all aloud, but “with this endeavour” – meaning the reconstruction of Ukraine – “approximately 800 billion dollars in capital would be mobilised in alignment”. Then the document details how to raise 800 billion dollars for Ukraine within a so-called Ukrainian “prosperity plan”. At the bottom, in small print – you see, my work isn’t simple – a sneaky footnote states that this 800 billion dollars doesn’t include military expenditure, as that’s a separate item: “According to the Ukrainian government, under the current circumstances, this may exceed 700 billion dollars.” So we’re at 1.5 trillion dollars! To ensure there’s no misunderstanding, the document states that in addition to collecting this money for Ukraine, this financial plan also aims for Ukraine to join the European Union by 2027 – this is written in the text! That’s next year! This is the reality. So if anyone tries to convince you that Ukraine’s EU membership – which would ruin Hungarian agriculture and take all our money – is in some distant future, don’t believe it, because it’s planned for 2027, early 2028. If someone says that the war in Ukraine won’t cost us money: 800 plus 700 billion dollars. So I want to briefly tell you, if we don’t stand our ground and swiftly and strongly declare that we won’t pay and we won’t participate, they’ll force us into a debt that not only our grandchildren will have to pay, but also our great-grandchildren: 1.5 trillion dollars! In an irony of history, the final instalment of Germany’s First World War reparations was quietly paid in 1990. So the economic consequences of a war, and how long successive generations must bear the financial cost, exceed our normal imaginative capacity. This could last two, three or four generations!
This is why one of the things that’s at stake in the 2026 election is whether we allow Hungary to be drawn into this financial debt slavery, or whether we say no and resist. To make this happen, we’ve launched a national petition, which I’ve also brought to you. [Shows a copy of the national petition.] Here in the package – so you can identify them – are the Brussels politicians who are on sale. By signing the petition there are three points you can express. The first is, “I reject the further financing of the Russo–Ukraine war.” Then, “I reject having the Ukrainian state’s functioning being paid for by us over the next ten years.” And “I reject the imposition of energy price increases due to the war.” This is the national petition. I urge you to complete it.
If Ukraine were a member of the European Union today, the European Union would be in direct military conflict with Russia. The reason we oppose Ukraine’s EU membership is not because our hearts are made of stone, but because we don’t want to bring disaster upon ourselves. In the long term, Ukraine is militarily uncertain: in places peaceful, in places a war zone. And if it were part of any integration – NATO or the European Union – which we’re also members of, there would be the perpetual risk that we too would be drawn into that conflict. This is why Ukraine must remain outside the European Union. Cooperation between Ukraine and the Union is necessary; they shouldn’t be left to fend for themselves. Agreements and strategic treaties should be made – not in a way that endangers us, but in a way that’s mutually beneficial. Allowing them full access and membership rights would put Hungary in permanent danger of war. So they must remain outside.
It’s not easy to stay out, Ladies and Gentlemen. It is not simple! There have been two world wars, we’ve had remarkable leaders, and none of them succeeded in keeping Hungary out of war. In the coming years, therefore, keeping Hungary out of the war will require great national unity. Thank you for the anonymous shout of support, but believe me, that alone will not be enough… I’ll be where I need to be, and I’ll hold up a flag under which people can gather – a flag that will always inspire pride. But a good state leader is not enough. Only full national unity can keep us out of the war. Decisions will need to be made, and pressure applied. Our determination must be maintained continuously.
And now, in the spirit of universal Catholic brotherhood, I want to tell you that while these dangers are coming from Ukraine, while the Ukrainians are trying to draw us into the war, and while they’re saying disgraceful and disrespectful things to us, Hungary today is caring for thirty thousand Ukrainian refugees. At the same time, Ukraine receives a large part of its energy supply from us. We provide 40 per cent of their electricity. And if we didn’t supply them with fuel, their vehicles wouldn’t operate. So I want to tell you that while we stand firm, defend our interests and don’t give in, we also have heart, and we provide help to those in distress – even if they’re Ukrainian.
Károly Szita: Thank you very much, Prime Minister. I haven’t been to this sector yet. There’s a young man in a tie who’s put up his hand. I can barely see. Please go ahead! The floor is yours.
Zoltán Gábor Horváth: I’m Zoltán Gábor Horváth, and in civilian life I’m a teacher. In my environment the following question has come up several times, and with it I’d like to turn slightly to international relations. Over the past weeks and months you’ve met President Trump several times. One could say he’s one of your favourite politicians, and you’ve praised him several times; there’s surely some reason for that. I’d like to ask whether this good relationship will have any positive effect on Hungary, on rural Hungary, or on the people of Somogy County. Thank you.
Let me answer that immediately. Let me answer right away, without collecting another two questions, because that might use up our time. So this isn’t a simple matter. Everything we see today from the American president and his circle is completely unusual for us. We’re not used to it. Moreover, we Central Europeans have our own cultural code that guides our behaviour, and I can say that it differs from the code according to which the American president operates. This is partly because Americans only speak in superlatives. Everything is “great”, “fantastic”, “outstanding”, and “historic”. These are the most restrained terms, of course. A Hungarian wouldn’t speak like that: a Hungarian might consider it boasting, and, both in personal conduct and international relations, would prefer restraint, sound judgement and self-confidence – but with restraint. But now that’s over. A businessman has arrived from America who says everything is big, fantastic, unprecedented, and that nothing will ever be as good as what we’re looking forward to now. And one can smile at that: Europeans smile at it with a kind of professorial smugness. But what’s the reality? The reality is that NATO has failed. It’s long ceased to function. Despite commitments, member countries haven’t spent even 2 per cent of their budgets on their militaries. You can say anything you like, but the President came along, and how much is being spent now? Two per cent! In fact, we’ve already committed to 3.5 per cent! So he’s saved NATO. One could criticise the American president, and say all sorts of things, and that he indulges in fantasies – for example about real estate projects in Gaza, which I see was the subject of an excellent presentation in Davos. One can say that, but not long ago people were being killed there by the thousands. Now that’s over: there’s peace, and people are no longer being killed there. And tonnes of drugs were being shipped from Venezuela to the Western world, to America. That has ended. Iran was a continuous threat; Iran is now neutralised. I can only say that while Westerners make mocking comments about the American president, the truth is that every international institution, run in the last thirty years in a polite, academic style, has become paralysed, and has produced no results. One man came along, upended it all, and now there are results. Of course it’s always less than he claims. But isn’t that how business works? Perhaps he wanted to put the whole of Greenland, like a big block of ice, into his whisky. That’s possible, and maybe he was unable to; but from now on that ice belongs to him, and what happens there will be according to his decisions – we can be quite certain of that. This will, of course, happen within NATO frameworks, but it will still be the case that everything that’s militarily important for the United States will happen. Therefore I suggest that we don’t get distracted by such rhetorical jibes, but instead focus on the heart of the matter. There’s an American president who decided that he isn’t going to just spend his time in office, but will do things: he’s going to solve problems, and he’s going to achieve goals. He’s set off, and he’s doing it. And if we’re lucky, he might even achieve a result in the Ukrainian–Russian war. We don’t know this, but it would be good, it would save us; because it’s certain that the Westerners – the Western Europeans – won’t achieve any results at all. I believe that today what matters is that America has a president whose style is unusual: sometimes abrupt, yet highly effective, confident and capable of taking action. Overall this is good for Hungary, because he’ll solve some of the international world’s unsolved problems. And that’s good for us too. If we don’t look at it through this lens, but through a Hungarian lens, then I can say that the fact he’s the President is important and advantageous for us for three reasons. Firstly, think if he weren’t the President, and if we hadn’t formed an alliance with each other in 2015 – which was eleven years ago, even before anyone took him seriously, but when we were already supporting him. Supporting him? “How we’re thundering across the bridge!”, as the little mouse says while walking alongside the elephant. So we were the only ones who didn’t criticise him, let’s put it that way – we just said that it would be good for the world if he won. So the first reason is that if he weren’t the President, if this weren’t the case, then in Hungary the reductions in household energy bills would already be at an end, since America ordered a ban on all gas and oil originating from Russia. We had to ensure that this stayed as it was, just with a side-note: an exception for the crafty operator that is Hungary. And this happened. And if, step by step over the past decade or more we hadn’t invested in our cooperation, friendship and fellowship with him, while the entire Western European political elite were constantly joking about him and mocking him, if we hadn’t done this, then today there would be no reductions in household energy bills. That’s the first thing. I won’t even mention that for MOL to be able to buy the Serbian oil refinery, American permission is required – which is also currently offered to us. The second thing that’s important is that American investments are arriving here – while at the same time there’s an ongoing process of American capital being taken home to the United States from everywhere else. Every week Péter Szijjártó inaugurates a new American investment that’s established in Hungary – specifically in the advanced technology sector. So today America is present as an investor with even greater force than it was before Trump. And the third is this certain financial shield – the specific form of which is subject to current ongoing negotiations. But I can tell you one thing: if anyone – whether on the London money market, or in Brussels in relation to the European Union budget – wants to create trouble for the Hungarians and wants to cause a financial crisis, then there’s an American connection which will help us to defend ourselves against it. So Hungary is also in financial security. Sorry, Karcsi [Szita]! These are all the things we’ve gained from it so far.
Károly Szita: I haven’t asked from over there yet. Go ahead, please! You’re not balding as much as I am, but, yes, there’s the microphone. Thank you very much!
Zsolt Jusits: Thank you very much, Mayor, for the floor. I’m Zsolt Jusits, a singer and the leader of an ensemble for nearly forty years, a local patriot from Kaposvár, a patriot, a father of three. And my next grandchild – my third grandchild – will be born in a month’s time. I know that you’re also doing well in terms of children and grandchildren, and I congratulate you on that, but my question is also partly about my anxiety. I’m the one asking the question, but I think I’m asking on behalf of all of us who are worried about you. This is specifically because we hear, read and see Zelenskyy’s statements and threats, and we know that the Ukrainian extremists are also out to get you, if I can put it that way. I know you’re a brave, proud Hungarian man, but regardless of that, I’d like to ask whether you aren’t afraid, or not concerned about their desire for revenge. This is my question. Thank you very much.
Karcsi, I’ll answer that.
Károly Szita: I thought so. Prime Minister, let’s not get into too much detail!
Let’s talk first generally about fear as such. There’s no courage without fear. Because fear is merely that which must be overcome. And this is how we decide who’s brave and who’s cowardly. The brave person overcomes their fear, the coward doesn’t. This is why there’s the oft-repeated old army story of someone trembling in a trench. The others are mocking him, but he says: “If you were as afraid as I am, you’d have run away long ago.” So of course one feels fear. Someone who has no fear isn’t brave – they’re, well, reckless. So when a Gypsy/Roma is selling his horse – you know, he wants to sell his blind horse, a horse that keeps walking into walls – and others tell him that it’s blind, he says, “It’s not blind, it’s just reckless!” So someone who has no fear isn’t brave, but reckless, and you have to be careful with them, because they can’t assess the risk of trouble occurring. So first of all, that’s enough about that. It’s not that the country is being led by leaders who know no fear, but by people who know exactly how things really work – from sport, from their upbringing, from their parents, from youthful escapades. So fear must be overcome. Now, when I look at the Ukrainians and I see my counterpart Zelenskyy making threats, I usually remind myself that he’s my fifth Ukrainian president. I won’t bring in any more witticisms from humorous folklore now, but you know, there’s the old bull standing on the hilltop… Well anyway, the first thing is that he’s my fifth president – and we don’t even remember the names of the previous four. Just saying. Personal threats must sometimes be taken seriously, but it’s the Prime Minister’s job to ensure there’s peace in the country. Everyone should be able to live their life in peace, without the need for heroism, no unnecessary heroics, at a calm, steady pace; everyone should be able to decide how they want to live, and be able to progress according to their own rhythm. So it’s not my job to keep the country in a state of agitation regarding this or that threat, but to handle these threats quietly, until it’s absolutely necessary for everyone to know about them. There are tools for this. This is why we sometimes order increased security readiness. Of course it’s not a pleasant feeling – that’s how it is, but this isn’t the permanent state. So today the level of threat isn’t universally high, but I’d say it’s medium, with occasionally extraordinary moments, and my family and I need to pay very close attention to those. The latter aspect worries and troubles me more than my own situation. There’s a peculiar Ukrainian form of threatening – I’m learning this myself now – which is actually combined with insults. So it’s not just a threat, but on top of that he insults you, doesn’t he? I tolerate insults well. I don’t think I have an overdeveloped ego, so the two of us manage, there’s room for both of us. The fact is that one must respond when an insult tramples on Hungary’s honour – that cannot be allowed. Hungary must always give everyone respect and recognition, but we cannot be spoken to in just any old way; and if someone doesn’t grant us that respect, then it’s the Prime Minister’s job to demand it and see that it’s granted. There’s no two ways about that! And besides, Hungarian domestic politics trains one well, doesn’t it? After all, in this von der Leyen, Weber, Zelenskyy, Péter Magyar package, there’s a Hungarian player too, isn’t there? He also spends his days threatening us, doesn’t he? What does one say to this? One says what I read somewhere long ago: “Sure, sure, but never taunt the crocodile about the size of his mouth until you’ve made it safely to the other side of the river.” That’s what I recommend.
And finally, in connection with fear and courage, there’s one more thing: how one should take on a conflict. Forgive me, Károly, but for me these are the most exciting questions. How should one enter into a conflict? In Brussels, say, when you know that no one will be with you, two or three are abstaining, and twenty-three or twenty-four of them rush at you. There’s a science to how to do this. You shouldn’t drift into it or jump into it, because that will lead to trouble. You must always assess the terrain well, you must take stock of the situation. You should harbour no illusions: you should only take on a conflict that you can win. You must never believe that you can win a conflict that’s larger than one that you’re capable of winning. So you need strategic calm. After that, you need to see who you can be allied with. Then who can be bought off or removed from the ranks of your opponents. And then you need a plan for how you enter the fray – like most recently, when we stayed out of the 90-billion-euro European Union loan to be given to Ukraine. When there’s a plan, at the right moment you step up to execute it. And, most importantly, there should always be an exit route, just in case the plan doesn’t work out. Something like that. And I know that this is what you see the most – because what else interests the public, but conflicts? But believe me, there isn’t a single conflict we have with the European Union that we haven’t thought through a dozen times, haven’t planned out, the course of which we don’t know, and in which we don’t know how we’ll win in the end – or if we can’t win, how we’ll back out of it. We won’t lead Hungary into any adventures, we won’t carry out any wild, irresponsible actions, because we are security itself, we are the safe choice. But you always have to try, because you can’t get ahead by moving at a snail’s pace. In international politics you don’t know where the wall is; you have an idea, and you try to feel where it is, but if you always stop because you feel that the wall is too close, then you won’t take a single step forward, and you’ll stay at a snail’s pace. You’ll share the fate of some other countries who, when they get a call from Brussels, only say one thing into the phone: “Jawohl!” We don’t want that. That’s not who we are. So conflict must be taken on in the way I’ve just described.
Károly Szita: Thank you very much indeed, Prime Minister. I haven’t looked over there yet, that way. Go ahead please! Another young man in a tie. To me everyone’s young, please understand that.
Tamás Nagy: Thank you very much, Mayor! Prime Minister, my name’s Tamás Nagy, I live in this city with my family, and I’m the head of the local music school. I say this because in recent years this institution had the good fortune to be renovated with significant government support. From this, you can see how much Fidesz doesn’t support education. I’d like to ask my question on a completely different topic. This isn’t really a Kaposvár problem I’m raising, because I experience it more on the southern shore of Lake Balaton, travelling the roads of Somogy County, in southern Somogy. In many settlements there are dirt roads, gravel roads, and the mayors there find it very difficult to fix them from their own resources. It’s a big burden for them, and I think that after a victorious 2026 election, the Government could put this right. Does the Prime Minister have a battle plan for this, and can we expect these roads to be renewed? Thank you very much.
Károly Szita: Thank you very much. Let’s move on. Someone here has been flagging for a long time. Go ahead please! Yes, I saw you much earlier – a blonde lady.
Mónika Szigeti: Thank you very much. I’m Mónika Szigeti, I teach here in the city, and I’m very grateful to have been given the microphone, because like the school head, I’d also like to thank the Prime Minister and the Government for the support we’ve received in recent years. This has been a huge help for us. My question is actually related to this. We’ve heard figures here like 800 billion dollars and 700 billion dollars – amounts we can’t even imagine. My question is that if this comes true and Ukraine receives this amount, what will happen to the other Member States, what will happen to us Hungarians, what will happen to our further development? I’d like to know what resources might still be available in the event of this. Thank you very much.
Károly Szita: Thank you very much. Dear Prime Minister, the floor is yours.
First of all, I thank the head of the music school for his question. I’d like to digress slightly. It’s not my job to evangelise in this country – that’s a different profession, though one related to mine. However, I encounter not only the economic problems of Hungarians, but their souls too: their troubles, if I may put it that way. And I’m certain that music is a good remedy. I’m certain that music is one of the best remedies for the many troubles that history has brought down upon us over the past hundred years, as a result of which we can’t straighten our backs properly, and as a result of which there’s somehow more mistrust in our relations with one another than there should be. Singing together heals the soul and creates community. So music schools will remain very important in the coming decades also. We have the Hungarian Village Programme, and we have the Competitive Districts Programme, and there’s this issue the school head mentioned: dirt roads in and around rural settlements. There are two categories here: the first is what’s within the settlements, and the other is what’s out among the fields. As for what’s within settlements, the local councils can count on us; they won’t have enough money – especially in small settlements – to fix those up, so a government programme is needed there. As for the neglected dirt roads out among the fields, the problem there isn’t just that they’re dirt roads, but that they aren’t in good repair; on that we’ll have to cooperate with the farmers. If the Good Lord helps us, I’ll have an offer for them after the election, in which they’ll take on something and we’ll take on something too. Then we’ll make the dirt roads out among the fields passable as well. And in the villages, as I said, we’ll provide government funding.
Since two teachers have honoured us with their contributions here, I’d like to say that I very much hope that relations between politics and teachers will also be settled. I’m not talking about the Fidesz government now, because that’s not what this is about, but about relations between teachers and whoever happens to be in power at the time. I can certainly say that it’s bad for everyone if teachers are frustrated. Because if someone’s frustrated, sooner or later that child is going to get a clip round the ear – even when they shouldn’t. So it’s very difficult to coax a child calmly into a state of steady, growing knowledge – to draw them in and educate them – if I myself am full of tension, beside myself with nerves, as it were. So it’s very important that teachers somehow find their place in Hungarian society. And in the past thirty years, this hasn’t really succeeded. So they’ve constantly felt that they’re being used, that they don’t get enough money, that they’re being bossed around, and there are all sorts of problems. Then, where there have been difficult social situations, they’re exposed to parents who go in and cause a scene – let’s be honest, that’s not unusual either. You know, we’ve had to establish a system of school policing, and so on. But now regarding salaries I think we’ve managed to reach a point where teachers earn around 900,000 forints per month on average. On average! I don’t mean to say that’s a lot, or that it’s solved everything, but I just want to say that we’ve taken the first step towards teachers not needing to look at themselves and their profession as if they’re victims, but being able to look at themselves as being engaged in a fantastic vocation, who can derive happiness from educating other people’s children to be smarter, better and nobler. My mother was a teacher; she’s still teaching my grandchildren now. I wouldn’t want to be in my grandchildren’s shoes – but that’s another matter. They’re kept busy, but that’s life! I know for sure that a good teacher is calm under all circumstances, loves children, loves the vocation they practice, and isn’t frustrated. Now we’ve solved part of this. But there are still other unsolved things there. We need to rethink the national curriculum. Let’s discuss how much methodological independence there will be for teachers, but also what the expectation from the centre is – because, after all, you can’t teach children just anything. I’ll fight until my last breath against there being a government in Hungary whose minister of culture and education is someone who has edited or written a textbook called “Csipkejózsika” [“Sleeping Boy Beauty”]. That’s inconceivable! So you can’t do just do anything. You can’t do just anything! So we must reach an agreement with the teachers on what it is we expect, what range one must stay within, what the programme – the educational programme – is that one must stay within, and within that, how they can teach it and what they accept as monitoring; because there’s no such thing as not monitoring or never measuring anything. That’s how the work will turn out too. So these collaborations between education management and teachers haven’t happened. I thought that when we created the Teachers’ Chamber, we’d created the institution that would solve this. But it didn’t work out; it didn’t happen that way. Therefore we must sit down again and discuss why not. But I think we’ve taken a very important step, a financial step, and now we really just need to negotiate with one another to find the method that teachers also consider good, that we consider good too, and where the kind of child parents get back from school is the kind that they’d like. Although this wasn’t the question, I wanted to say this, as it’s come from you.
However, your question was about what will happen to EU funds if our money is sent to Ukraine. I’ll answer that question by answering something else. Let’s talk a bit about what the situation with these EU funds actually is. Because it’s like the mysterious owl in the scary tales told to me in childhood: everyone pictures it, but no one has actually seen it. What is this EU money? First of all, Hungary pays into the Union and also receives funding from there. If I subtract one from the other – the amount we gain as a financial benefit from membership – it’s 3 per cent of Hungary’s total annual national output! So anyone who thinks that EU funds solve everything in this country isn’t aware of the reality. What we produce in this country is 100 per cent GDP, and 3 per cent of that arrives as money from the Union. So we’d get by even without EU money, since it’s 3 to 97. Why do we fight for EU money anyway? Because it’s due! It’s ours! It’s not a case of them giving it if they feel like it: there’s a system of rules, based on which this is due to the Hungarians – and what’s due must be given to us. Therefore, we’ll fight for it. They don’t want to give it. What should be done with someone who doesn’t want to give it? It must be taken from them! How should it be taken? This is fine so far, but in international politics, how should it be taken? So that it looks as if they’d have given it anyway. This is what I’m working on. Let’s talk numbers now. I can say that 22 billion euros is due to us over seven years, and the Brusselites believe that they’ve given 12 billion of this on their own initiative. That’s already been dealt with: 12 billion euros is in our account. The question is about how quickly we process the announced tenders, and how those who are contracted after those tenders submit the invoices. That’s underway. There’s still 10 billion left that they have to give us so that meanwhile they feel good about it. There will be plenty of moments when they will feel comfortable enough to release the funds. On that, I give you my word — you can be sure of it…
Károly Szita: Ladies and Gentlemen, Dear Friends, I’m the ugly, the evil and the bad, all in one. I’m the ugly, the evil and the bad all in one, and I’m not saying what I’m about to say because I’m afraid of getting a kick in the backside from here on the right, but because they’ve whispered in my ear that at some point we have to bring today to an end. Before I hand the floor back to the Prime Minister and then to Philip I can tell you only one thing. I can state one thing to you for certain: this isn’t the last time we’ll see Viktor Orbán in Kaposvár. And I’m also sure, Ladies and Gentlemen, and let’s do everything we can for this, that after 12 April – and it doesn’t matter now what he tells me about whether or not he’s coming – I can welcome him in Kaposvár as Prime Minister once again. Prime Minister, thank you very much!
Thank you very much for the kind welcome, and for sticking with us here for over an hour. Thank you for your questions. Thank you for forgiving me for my answers, which sometimes wandered off and found it hard to get back onto the main road.
Yes, but life is like that too, you’re right. Fidesz is the safe choice. I also came here to convince you of this. I’ve presented one half of my arguments. We live in an age of dangers, there will be more dangerous moments, there’s a direct threat of war, young people are threatened by the danger of serving in the war, the danger of military service, and we’re all threatened by economic bankruptcy if we don’t resist everything wanted by Brussels and the representatives of a would-be puppet government sent here from Brussels. The reason that Fidesz is the safe choice is that we stand on national foundations, and you can be sure that we’ll always say no to all that – because it would be bad for Hungary. But Fidesz is also the safe choice because of what we spoke about at the beginning of today’s meeting. I’ve been sitting in your kitchen, haven’t I? For thirty-seven years! We know each other, don’t we? There aren’t many surprises. And between us there’s perhaps more than just a relationship; we could quietly call it friendship. What’s the true hallmark of friendship? It’s easy to be friends when the other person is perfect. The great thing is when we accept the other person too: sometimes they make mistakes, they aren’t perfect, we don’t like everything, but we stick by them, and they always stick by us too. This is why Fidesz is the safe choice! We’ll always stick by you. Fidesz will be the party of the Hungarian people: we’ll never allow anyone to come from Brussels or elsewhere with a programme that’s bad for the Hungarian people. I understand that sometimes change is needed too – and besides, young people need space as well. And I also understand if someone wants to be Prime Minister – such things happen. There’s a time for everything. Now isn’t the time for experimenting, dear people of Kaposvár; now we must go for the sure thing. Fidesz is the safe choice. Go Kaposvár! Go Hungary!
