Brussels, 05/07/2011 (Agence Europe) - There were no surprises for the Hungarian head of government, Viktor Orbán, when the time came for drawing up the balance sheet of six months of Hungarian presidency. Although European Commission President José Manuel Barroso and all the members of the EPP praised Orbán to the skies, the verdict of the other groups, albeit often positive regarding the Presidency's concrete achievements, was very severe regarding Orbán's personal style and his initiatives concerning media laws and the new Hungarian constitution. President Barroso opened the debate with a point by point overview of the results reached during the Hungarian Presidency (one of which - agreement on the European patent - put an end to decades of impasse). The Hungarian Presidency can but be lauded for results like these in circumstances that have been so testing for the Union.
EPP leader Joseph Daul of France took up this positive outcome point by point. He ended by saying “thank you” to the Hungarian Presidency and “take heart” to the Polish Presidency.
Yes, the Hungarian Presidency has done a good job, especially on the Croatian issue and on the strategy relating to the Roma, but it did less well in its role of representation and that of setting an example, said Johannes Swoboda of Austria, speaking on behalf of the S&D Group. Swoboda grumbled that the EPP had been thanked, and only the EPP, saying that never before has a Presidency praised the good collaboration of a single group. The “Socialists are not the only ones to criticise you”, he added, citing remarks made by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
The position of the ALDE Group is close to that of the Socialists. Alexander Graf Lambsdorff of Germany recognised the Presidency's successful results in many areas (although he would have liked more on governance), but did not hesitate to criticise it with regard to media laws (which have been amended but not on key issues) and on the process for adopting the constitution. “We must be under an obligation to be vigilant towards all Union countries, including my own”, he concluded. Daniel Cohn-Bendit (Greens/EFA) told Orbán that he failed to understand him, saying that, sometimes he speaks one way and then, at others, he speaks another way, saying he will not be subject to the “diktat of Brussels”. The German MEP saw this as a “case of generalised schizophrenia” - good work is being done by “your team” in Strasbourg and Brussels while, in Budapest, achievements are being “unpicked”.
The disappointment expressed by Jan Zahradil (ECR) is of quite a different origin. The Czech representative deplores what he considers as a regrettable tendency, not only on the part of Hungary but also on the part of the new member states in general, to come into line with the position held by the “older states”, clinging to ideas that he sees as outmoded and to which citizens cannot rally. Miloslav Ransdorf (GUE/NGL, Czech Republic) said he loved Hungary and Hungarian culture but had to admit that the “Presidency's results are nothing” to brag about. The compliments made by Nigel Farage (EFD, the UK) are a two-edged sword. He told Orbán that his argument in defence of the nation state makes him the “secret weapon” of the eurosceptics. After the debate, Orbán thanked him for his “kind words”, but energetically added: “We, the Hungarians, we are not eurosceptic”.
A number of EPP elected members wished to reaffirm their satisfaction of the work accomplished by the Hungarian Presidency, especially Carlo Casini of Italy, who welcomed the way in which the Presidency had worked with his committee, and said that it is not up to the Union to criticise national constitutions. He received an indirect denial from the vice-president of the European Commission, Maroš Šefcovic, who said at the end of the debate: “This is a serious matter that should be looked into in earnest. The Commission takes its role of guardian of EU law seriously and will not hesitate to use its prerogatives.”
There was a flow of criticism from Socialists and Liberals. Hungarian Socialist Csaba Sandor Tabajdi spoke of the “dismantlement of the democratic state”. He also pointed out that the initial reservation concerning media legislation was expressed by right or centre-right governments (Germany, France, Luxembourg). In the same spirit, Lena Ek (ALDE, Sweden) said that the Hungarian Presidency, which was effective on several issues, did not serve the image of the Union well in matters such as the defence of democracy and of human rights. Of the same group, Charles Goerens of Luxembourg does not share Orbán's optimism. Europe is not stronger than it was six months ago, he said, adding that that was conjecture and that the adversaries of Schengen have become stronger. On the subject of future enlargements, these, he said, will make the Union stronger, if it gives itself rules allowing the Copenhagen criteria to be respected, “not only before but also after accession”.
Viktor Orbán's answer was categorical, saying: “Without the support of the EPP, the Hungarian Presidency would not have obtained the same results”. He defends the new Hungarian constitution as a democratic and modern constitution. (L.G./transl.jl)