n reply to a journalist’s question on whether Mr. Orbán finds is necessary to hold debates on basic values, the Prime Minister answered in the affirmative; he pointed out that at different times and in different situations political leaders sometimes come to completely different conclusions, even though the principles and values they refer to are the same.

At the press conference the Prime Minister highlighted that, although officially the EP debate was about Hungary, as a result of the event the first steps have been taken towards tackling a European issue of huge importance: migration.

“A debate has been started in the EU on migration, which gives us hope of success”, he said. He said he believed that the European Commission’s proposal on the introduction of refugee quotas in order to regulate refugee intake would only increase migration to the EU, and called it a political mistake which could have irreversible consequences for the entire continent.

According to the Prime Minister, until now the debate within Europe has mixed together the issues of refugees, economic migrants and guest workers, but we must handle them separately and introduce specific regulations for each of them. He declared that, in addition to questions of human rights, the issues which must be addressed are economic, demographic and cultural.

Mr. Orbán reiterated that if Hungary were to decide independently on how to regulate migration, the problem would disappear. He also mentioned that in 2012 the EU prohibited Hungary from taking into custody people who call themselves refugees and who have crossed the Hungarian border illegally.

The Prime Minister said that the differences in views are not only dependent on party affiliation: there are various opinions within the European People’s Party (EPP), for instance. In reply to a question from the MTI news agency he admitted that, compared to similar previous EP debates, this time there had been more criticism from the EPP. He said, however, that he believed this was partly due to the fact that the true essence of the wording in the national consultation questionnaire on migration is very difficult to convey in other languages.

The other source of criticism can be traced back to the fact that within the EPP family of parties some are more radical and some are more moderate; this large family is not easy to hold together, the Prime Minister said, adding that he would attend an EPP group meeting following the press conference.

In answer to a question from the online news site Pesti Srácok, the Prime Minister described the European Commission’s appointment of Altus – the company of Hungarian opposition politician Ferenc Gyurcsány – as scandalous. He added that he was also considering addressing this issue.

Mr. Orbán said that he has seen much during the history of the European Union, but nothing like this scandal which the European Union has involved itself in.

“There can be no doubt that this is nothing but the provision of EU funds – in the guise of a business contract – to a company which is obviously also using them for party political purposes”, Mr. Orbán said. He added that the issue has a Hungarian dimension, which will be settled back home, but it also has a European dimension.

The Prime Minister said that “The European Union already has enough problems, and citizens have enough reason to criticize the EU”, adding that he does not understand why it is necessary to add to the burdens by creating a European financial scandal related to party funding.

The press release is available in English in the attached file.

Source: Prime Minister's Office

Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s response to questions from Members of the European Parliament

19 May 2015, Strasbourg

Mr. President, Esteemed Members of Parliament,

We have heard speakers from France, Italy, Germany, Scandinavia and the Baltic states. Without mentioning them by name, I would merely point out that as a matter of conscience I would never dream of talking about their countries, their peoples and their nations in such a manner. Therefore allow me the opportunity to express the respect of Hungary and the Hungarian nation for those countries represented by people who have attacked Hungary here today. Please allow me to refrain from responding to contributions from Hungarian Members of the European Parliament, because I would not like to turn this event into a petty Hungarian squabble, or to present our country in such a light. I shall simply acknowledge that Hungarian Members of the European Parliament have attacked their own country here today, and that furthermore one person even went so far as to suggest that the European Union should withdraw funding from Hungary because the country does not deserve it. May that be on their consciences.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

One speaker mentioned illiberal democracy. There is no time to elaborate on this here. I would merely say that, in my view, at the time of the 2008 financial crisis liberal organisational principles at work in the economy and in society clearly failed; this is why we are in the crisis that we find ourselves in today.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I was pleased to hear that many of you have read Sándor Márai. But do you not think it a little perverse for you to seek to explain to us Hungarians the content, the form and the spiritual essence of the work of our great national poet? I was pleased to acknowledge the contribution from Mr. Louis Michel, who lectured me on democracy. For your information, I have stood for election as prime minister six times, I have lost in three elections and won in three; there will probably be further occasions. I do not see this as evidence of a lack of democracy or of an autocratic regime.

Similarly, please allow me to respond to the leader of the Liberals.

Mr. President,

I believe I understand your situation and your motivations, because the Liberals were once a major party in Hungary, and played a significant role in the fight against communism. Yet they have almost completely disappeared from the public arena. I understand that this enrages European Liberals, but please do not be angry with Hungarian voters – including myself – on that account.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I ought to share one piece of information with those who object to our public consultation questionnaire. The leader of the Liberals finds the following question inappropriate: “Would you support the Hungarian Government in the introduction of more stringent immigration regulations, in contrast to Brussels’ lenient policy?” This lies at the root of the problem, this is the very heart of the matter! We had no such problem prior to 2012, Ladies and Gentlemen! Hungary had its national legislation, and it was able to detain asylum-seekers at the Hungarian border and to ensure that correct legal procedure was followed with respect to them. In 2012 the European Union forced us to change the Hungarian regulations, and since that time economic migrants have flooded into the country. We would not have a problem today if you had not forced Hungary to change its regulations. I appreciate that the European Union wanted to test a new form of regulation in Hungary; a few years have gone by, and it clearly does not work. Please enable us to defend Hungary ourselves.

And finally, Ladies and Gentlemen, this will be a long debate – whether on the issue of the death penalty, the issue of asylum-seekers, or the issue of economic migrants. I am pleased that here today we have achieved our goal. The debate has begun. Even if this is going to be a long road, today Europe has taken the first step.

Thank you for your attention.

MTI Photo: Szilárd Koszticsák