Budapest, 6 November 2013

Good Morning! Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to thank you for giving me the chance to be with you again. I am happy to see that the number of invited organisations is on the increase. In the report before me, I can see that 49 organisations of scattered Hungarian communities sent their delegates to the 2011 founding meeting. Today’s third meeting is now attended by the representatives of 75 organisations. If this continues at the same rate, we shall soon have to knock the wall out over there and have to enlarge the building of the Hungarian Parliament, which is otherwise a reasonable and legitimate idea as we shall have a pan-Hungarian Parliament after the next parliamentary elections. The other important thing that lies here before me: the Deputy Prime Minister informed me that the number of reports filed by Hungarian organisations against one another fell to some one tenth. We know our own kind. We know that this number is extremely significant, and I believe that this is also a sign of cooperation and the readiness to cooperate; perhaps, the sign of a culture which will determine relations between Hungarian organisations beyond the borders – whether diasporic or organisations in the Carpathian Basin – in the next few years. This amply demonstrates that if you leave misery, poverty and desperation behind, you will not only have a better life overall but, somehow, the spiritual quality of life will also take a turn for the better. And if we find that there is room for everyone, we shall seek and covet cooperation, rather than squabble over our scare resources, as we did so often in the past 150 years of Hungarian history both without and, I regret to say, within the state borders. I therefore sincerely hope that this tiny little statistical data is the impression of a positive spiritual change within Hungarian communities both within and beyond the borders.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

If I remember correctly from the previous two occasions, you primarily expect me to give an overview of what is happening in Hungary and to attempt to put a construction on that which is happening in Hungary in a broader context. It goes without saying that this means a European context and, with regard to the fact that we are undergoing global changes, a wider global context. You also expect me to outline the events and opportunities which lie ahead of us and which Hungarian communities around the world may turn to their benefit.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

To this end, we shall now take a closer look at some global processes which we regularly analyse at the meetings of the Hungarian Government whenever we are to adopt decisions of greater significance. And I shall also say a few words about how we see our broader homeland, Europe, and the place which Hungary occupies within the European Union.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

If we approach this issue from a historical perspective – and we, Hungarians have a tendency of looking at things from a historical perspective, while I should also note that several members of this audience have earned distinction with writings and studies of this nature –; if we look at what is happing to us today from a historical perspective, we may see that it is a concomitant of great global changes that the economic, political and often, cultural premises that were previously held valid are being called into question. If we think back to the last century, this was always the case. From that period, we know four such major global reshuffles: the global rearrangement after World War I, the Great Depression, World War II and finally, the collapse of communism. Each of these periods was characterised by the common factor that the previous era’s economic, cultural and political premises underwent significant changes. This is how we may know that new eras started in the last century no fewer than four times.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

If we examine what is happening to the world and to us in the second decade of the 21st century from this perspective, we may see that we are undergoing yet another reshuffle; the fifth one, or if you like, we are experiencing the first major period of rearrangement of this century. At least, based on the Hungarian analysis and the assessment of the Hungarian Government. We can see that the positions of a number of countries and regions previously attained in world politics have been called into question; in particular, the weight and role of Europe. Additionally, Europe previously achieved such heights, in contrast to which the decline experienced is rather spectacular. Just think of this. What did you think, say 25 years ago, when you heard the name of Brazil? Mostly, you had an image in your head of barefoot children who were hoping to become footballers one day and to thereby help their families out of their deprived situation. If we utter the name of Brazil today, we may still have the same images in our heads; however, this time, combined with completely different images. We can see the economic data, industrialisation, prosperity. Or if I think back to my own childhood when I did not eat my lunch or dinner, I was always told that children in China would, because we thought of China as a place where there is nothing to eat, children are toiling in the rice fields and are happy just to survive and not die of starvation. 20 to 25 years have gone by, and if we say the word China, what is it that comes to mind? And if someone had said 30 years ago that this country would threaten the world economic hegemony of the United States in say 25 to 30 years, we would have, no doubt, laughed. All these perspectives – perspectives of one or two decades – demonstrate that what we are experiencing are not mere changes or a mere recession but a global reshuffle, and if the Hungarian people wishes to understand where its position lies and what opportunities it has in the world, it must also think in terms of these correlations and must not dispense with self-evaluation also in this context.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We regularly console ourselves, whenever we, Prime Ministers meet at summits in the European Union, by saying that we have this financial crisis here in Europe, which has now also spread to the real economy, but this is only temporary, the situation will change sooner or later, this short transitional phase will soon revert to a phase of growth and Europe will be able to reclaim – and we often think, almost automatically – the world economic, world cultural and world political positions which we previously had. Regrettably, we cannot tell what the future holds; however, I believe that it would be a mistake to rule the possibility out that the present European situation – and there are many of you here from Western-European countries – will not be a mere transitional phase but will prove to be a longer historical period which will, in a best-case scenario, manifest itself in the form of stagnation, rather than decline, while others, other regions and continents that compete with us will overtake us. We cannot rule out this eventuality. The situation is somewhat better than it was in that, as Hungary, too, forms part of this community, it is also up to us, though not to a decisive degree, whether this will be the fate of Europe or not. Without engaging in any in-depth analysis, I would just like to note that the United States, which is one of our major allies – NATO provides the primary framework for Hungary’s system of alliance and the United States is, of course, the dominant force in that organisation –, did not seem to have resigned itself to the loss of its world supremacy in any field, and therefore undertook to engage in the competition that is going on today globally. I sincerely hope that the United States will be able to achieve breakthrough results in the future as a dominant power of the entire western civilisation. As regards Hungary, as we are experiencing the rise of the eastern world day by day, at a delay of a decade, we have finally embarked on a policy which the French and the Germans, not even mentioning the Brits, embarked upon much earlier. On the basis of this, we must take advantage of the opportunities offered by this major reshuffle in the world economy. As a result of this policy, these countries opened their doors to the countries of the east. Hungary lost a decade. Hungarian-Chinese and Hungarian-Indian relations intensified a decade too late; we formed the required institutional frameworks much later than the French or the Germans did. However, better late than never; we have embarked on this policy and started adopting this way of thinking. You should not be surprised if you often find reports in the future on Hungary in the global economic news informing the public that we set up mixed economic committees with China, India, Indonesia or Kazakhstan, to mention but one former Soviet territory.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It is important for Hungarians to pay attention to the global economic changes by using a broader horizon because if we think back to the last century, we may conclude that we were always on the receiving end of these major reshuffles. Our meeting today itself is proof of the fact that we suffered as a consequence of these changes and many of you who live in scattered communities around the world today were removed from the stem of the nation or the motherland because Hungary did not succeed in escaping these great world economic and world political rearrangements unscathed. This is a grave lesson and must warn and encourage us in an intellectual sense to pay attention to changes continuously as we have learnt at our own expense that Hungary cannot remove itself from their consequences. We may think of World War I, World War II or the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There is something here that I may have also mentioned last time, but I would now like to present it in more vivid detail. I belong to the generation of politicians – and while in terms of age I perhaps do not fall into the same category as some of you around this table, in a certain sense, you, too, belong to that generation – whose political mentality was guided by a very simple scheme in the last 25, or perhaps as many as 30 years. This scheme was durable and correct at the time. The reason why I bring this up is that I now believe that it has lost its validity. What if you had been asked 30 years ago what Hungary should do to provide a successful, economically strong and thriving existence for its citizens to rival living standards in Western Europe, once we succeed in pushing the Soviet army out of Hungary and succeed in breaking the rule of the communists – both of which feats we achieved? I believe that if you had been asked this question 30 years ago, you would have said what I said at the time, and also quite recently; namely, that there is no need to invent something that others before us have already invented. The West, and in particular, Western Europe has a highly successful economic and social model, the world’s leading and much coveted economic and social model; mutatis mutandis, translated into the Hungarian context, we should effectively do what they do because if it made them successful, it will make us, too, successful. This idea persisted for a long time, and I must repeat, it was valid. However, if we think back to the past seven to eight years, in particular, the beginning of the world economic or global financial crisis, 2007 and 2008, and observe that our continent has since made very little progress, we may conclude that this mentality quite markedly lost its validity. There are certain values that have retained their validity: the constitutional state, freedom rights, policies based on the principle of popular representation. These are all valid. However, what kind of economic and social model should we build in order to make Hungary successful? If someone were to suggest that we should do what the West does, this proposal would perhaps not meet with a warm and enthusiastic welcome – without mentioning any specific Western European country and without ignoring the otherwise existing and very much persistent difference in living standards between certain Western European countries and Hungary which is part of reality. If I take a look at the growth trends, we cannot say that we should do what they do. I shall just briefly return to the fact that the European Union issued its autumn economic forecast yesterday. We know that two evaluations are issued annually in the EU with respect to the economic performance of the Member States; one in the spring and the other one in the autumn. The autumn one was released yesterday. If, beyond the mere figures, you also observe the trends, you may see that the argument, based on which we should do what the others do in the West, no longer holds valid.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In a new psychological state of mind when you suddenly realise that you have lost your crutches – because we have lost our intellectual crutches which made it so simple to say that we should do what they do –, there are two possible reactions. We are all human, and if faced with such an unexpected, new situation, human beings may respond in one of two ways. There are some who feel scared because they believe that they have lost their foothold. There are many who feel this way in Hungary today. If you take a look at Hungary’s contemporary intellectual life, you may see and read writings of this type almost seized with desperation which seek to distort reality and the actual situation in order not to have to admit that we have lost our crutches. There is another option, however. There is the type that is not seized with fear but feels encouraged to devise his own solutions. This type of person sees a kind of inspiration in this situation, an opportunity to abandon former schemes of thinking and to find new ones. This is an interesting and exciting situation for many, and if we do well, it may even amount to a challenge with the promise of a positive outcome. The Hungarian Government falls into the latter category. We do not see the phenomenon I have just described as a loss. In a political and intellectual sense, we do not see it as a source of danger but as an opportunity as Hungarians have their own specific frame of mind, and if we accept the three principles which I believe continue to hold valid as part of the Western European model and world, which we may call constitutionality, freedom rights and popular representation, we may build different buildings on these foundations. Based on the Hungarian frame of mind, we may build a new economic regime, a different cultural system, and a novel social system.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We have every right to do so as Hungary is a free country; its leaders, Parliament and Government were elected by the people. I believe that the freedom of politics and the height of the horizon of political thinking have grown and expanded in consequence of what I have just described.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Let me now dwell for a moment on an ideological expression that is very much detectable in European politics to this very day. Interestingly, I also find its impressions in Hungarian politics, even if as a variety; in history textbooks, literature textbooks and other secondary and even elementary school textbooks. This is the problem of progress. The whole European culture, furthermore, Western-European culture is based, as a matter of course, on unconditional respect for progress, and believes that progress is something that we should take our hats off to even without a more thorough investigation. It is unclear, however, as to which way progress should take us. If we find ourselves in a situation that Europe is in at present; if what we do continuously leads to a competitive disadvantage and causes us to fall behind; in other words, if we continue to pursue that which we referred to as progress, it will not result in progression but in regression. And if we are in a state of regression, we may have to stop to think that stopping and changing our course may perhaps lead to progress. We may even have to revert on our path because we realise that we set out on the wrong track. If you set out on the wrong track and continue the same path onward, it does not necessarily mean progress but, to quote Bibó, results in the pursuance of the wrong track or a loss of track for the entire country or the entire continent even.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I must say that there are experiments in the European Union to adjust the wrong course that we are on – I could mention the recent fierce debate on the banking union which is a very important debate within the EU, the re-regulation of the financial system from scratch which is also a highly important and promising debate or the reduction and reform of bureaucracy within the EU. There are experiments; however, on the whole these are still only experiments. The European Union in its present state has to date been unable to carry out the self-adjustment which would have made it competitive once again in comparison with the world’s rising regions and nations.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I believe that there two compelling items of evidence that prove that our continent, and for some time, also Hungary, were on the wrong track. One of them is the omission of our Christian roots from the European Constitution which is not a cause but a consequence; it is self-denial. We may therefore look upon Europe as a continent that, upon the drafting of its fundamental charter, simply erased two thousand years from its own history – very much the way party leaders no longer enjoying their former popularity in the Soviet system were erased from party photos. If this is the way we treat our own history and do not build on our own traditions, there is a high risk of losing sight of the right track. If I take a look at countries on the rise, whether the countries of Latin-America or the countries of Asia, I cannot see a single successful advancement model that would not rely on the given country’s intellectual and cultural background, natural features and formerly accumulated values. The debate, when we were discussing the passages of the new European treaty relating to Christianity, was clearly a symbolic momentum of this process, and Europe eventually gave the wrong answer to this question and cut these two thousand years out of its own history.

The other important thing that we should draw attention to is that you must have read or are reading at present studies and books which were written in the last twenty to thirty years or are being written today and are concerned with the future of the western world. You may remember books which foretold what difficulties western man will be faced with on account of the increased competitiveness of the economy, the rapid advancement of technology, the fact that fewer and fewer people’s work will be needed and how people will pass their time idly while their self-sustenance will be provided for without their personal involvement. Those who come from America may remember the term „tititainment” which was, at one point in time, a very trendy theory in Western Europe; the word originates from the combination of the words „entertainment” and „tits”, the female breasts. This theory upheld that some sort of entertainment must be produced for the good Western-Europeans because they will be able to sustain themselves without work; however, in order to maintain political stability, they must be given some occupation to pass their time with. This may seem as a caricature of the term introduced by Mr Brzezinski; however, as far as its essence is concerned, what I am saying is very much to the point. There was indeed, and still is, an ideology that does not wish to build the future of the West on respect for work and a work-centred economy but on something completely different. There are still some countries where major political forces enter the political stage with programmes aimed at the continuous reduction of working hours. They do so while we may all see that we are suffering from unemployment, living standards are declining and we are facing serious cultural consequences as a result of the fact that entire generations, some 20 to 25 per cent of young people are unable to find jobs. If you observe the Western European media, you may see that this is the greatest social challenge. Consequently, Europe has given up two fundamental values that form part of its very essence: Christianity and the work-based economy. The combined loss of these two values has led us where we are now.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Seeing this situation, the Hungarian Government has drawn its conclusions. You must have observed the debates – sometimes exciting, at other times fierce – that the Fundamental Law, Hungary’s new constitution provoked. If we rise above the level of political pettiness, disregard party-politically motivated arguments and elevate the new Hungarian Fundamental Law to the horizon and context that I was talking about just now, you will find that our new Fundamental Law addresses all these problems. On the one hand, it acknowledges, praises and appreciates Hungary’s Christian traditions with reservations, clearly lays down St. Stephen’s fundamental principles, looks upon the work of King St. Stephen as a message that is topical also at present, simultaneously renders it clear that we must build an economic system in Hungary that is based on work, and creates the framework for this. I am therefore compelled to say that, in consequence of the evaluation of the global and European situation briefly analysed here, the motherland has given the answer to the crisis which western civilisation is in today. It is, of course, open to dispute whether this is the correct answer. The fact that it is a gratifying answer for us cannot be disputed. The reason why we inserted these passages is that not only did we think that this was the correct thing to do but also because we believed that this is what we are, this is what expresses best what the Hungarian people stand for today and what may be regarded as the Hungarian cultural, historical and spiritual heritage. But whether this is a useful answer and whether the future indeed lies where we think it does, no one can give a positive answer. We believe that it is and it does. We made our assessments, analysed the situation, took the risks into consideration, looked at other solutions, and finally came to the conclusion that this is what will make Hungary and the entire Hungarian nation strong. I am going to say one more time, I sincerely hope and trust that this answer is the correct answer, and I do not wish to confuse daily economic information with historical perspective as I just drew attention to the risks that may lie therein. I think it is remarkable, however, that Hungary, rather than the Hungarian Government which is part of the Hungarian nation; so I naturally mean the Government as well but I am not talking about the Government – I am talking about Hungary – has achieved outstanding results in the past three years on these very foundations. In the past three years, Hungary has succeeded in rendering a performance that even our opponents were compelled to describe as successful in recent months.

It is natural that you should receive encouragement from your friends. It is also natural that well-meaning people seek to see the good side of any work done. It is likewise natural that those who share the same views as us in an intellectual and moral sense perceive what we do as fruitful. This in itself is gratifying and encouraging as well as important; however, far from being proof. The proof is when even your opponents say „Damn it! They might be right in the end!”. And today we are very close to this moment, Ladies and Gentlemen, We are very close to this moment as we were compelled to engage in serious debates and arguments with many international factors, from the European Union, through the European Parliament, to the IMF, for our own independence, our own economic policy and our own social ideas.  And if you care to take a look at the forecasts of these same institutions regarding Hungary today – you may still hear the grinding of the teeth, you may even hear the enamel crack –, they may not be happy to commit their findings to paper, but the world is not such a bad place after all and facts do count for something; and while they state their reservation that the path that we chose may not be the right one, the fact remains that there are only five countries out of the 28 EU Member States that were able to reduce their sovereign debts. We are one of these five. There are very few countries which are able to keep their budget deficits below the annual fiscal deficit level of 3 per cent designated as the EU target deficit rate. There are very few, perhaps less than a dozen, and we are among them. There are few countries which may claim that not only this year and the next but also in 2015 there will be a clear growth in their economies; Hungary is one of these countries. If you take a look at this EU forecast that was released yesterday not merely with a view to the figures of Hungary but with a view to the average figures of the euro zone and the averages of the entire European Union, that is, all 28 Member States, you may see that Hungary is doing better in every department than the average. This does not mean that we live in prosperity. This does not mean that everything is well. And in particular, this does not mean that we do not have a lot to do. However, it does mean that the direction that we chose has led to tangible results, even in the eyes of our opponents, upon the passage of three years. This is something that we should cherish; a major achievement and an invitation and encouragement that it is worth navigating the boat of Hungary in effectively the same direction, even if there is scope for doing it better, being smarter or perhaps, more cautious.

I sincerely hope that, with the EU’s three-year projection that was released yesterday and that contains the data I just mentioned, a debate in Hungary may finally come to a close. The debate which is concerned with the direction itself, the question of the constitutional foundations. The debate on whether those foundations are sound and reasonable and whether they provide guidance in the right direction. I sincerely hope that the debates that today still question the very foundations, debates that are not about the consequences but about the foundations, will gradually fade away, and debates in Hungary’s public life will slowly shift to the minor adjustments that should be made to the work we began on the foundations that we may now consider stable. I believe that we have successfully won these battles. We repaid our debt to the IMF sooner than we were required. We are now standing on our own two feet. It is an important achievement that we intensified the involvement of banks in taxation. It is an important achievement that we also intensified the involvement of large international corporations in local taxation. It is an important achievement that we have, in the meantime, succeeded in entering into strategic agreements with more than thirty large global corporations. While we imposed increased taxes on this sector, we managed to conclude separate bilateral strategic agreements with more than thirty large global corporations, the budgets of which are larger than the budgets of some European countries, with respect to their presence and developments in Hungary and their participation in Hungary’s life, which provides a stable and reliable frame for the Hungarian economy and provides a chance for small and medium-sized businesses to take advantage of the opportunities offered by these large global businesses.

Ladies and Gentlemen, While the electoral campaign will appear to refute all that I am saying now – as we may agree that this is what electoral campaigns are about, and obviously, your countries are no exception – and there will be heated debates, everyone will feel behind these debates that a consensus is slowly and gradually unfolding in Hungary with respect to the constitutional foundations and the basic issues concerning the country’s economic regime. I would also like to remind you of a promising development. Ten years ago – and I am not going to name parties or even mention ideological trends because you know, anyway, what I am talking about – a consensus between the dominant political forces regarding an important national issue, with special regard to an issue concerning Hungarian communities abroad, was inconceivable. I am certainly not trying to say that one political side has the same ideas today about Christianity, nation and national cohesion as the other. I may firmly claim, however, that the way things stand today, if a strategically important bill is presented to Parliament concerning the entire nation, there is a good chance that it will receive 80-90 or even 95 per cent support. As did the legislation concerning dual citizenship, and while there was a debate on the day of national remembrance, all political forces took part in the debate, and we may clearly observe in general – for instance, last time on the occasion of the Szekler march – that the right and left wings of politics uniformly stood up in favour of the Szeklers’ movement, even if the language and the arguments used were different. Would you have thought ten years ago, when one side accused the other of treason, fascism, communism or nationalism, as the case may have been from their respective sides, when there was a state of chaos and cacophony that we all perceived more or less the way I am describing it now, that we would reach a point where more than 90 per cent of the parliamentary parties vote in favour of dual citizenship? 98 per cent! Zsolt Semjén says. Or that we all endorse the cause of the Szekler march and uniformly support it? There are some interesting things going on in Hungary today. And as we have made perceivable and promising progress in respect of agreement on issues concerning Hungarian communities beyond the borders, so may we come to the same agreement, over the course of the years, on other significant issues such as the constitution, the foundations of our economic system and the principles of taxation. Stability combined with unity will be the most coveted value in Europe in the next few years, in my opinion.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In the context of the situation of Hungary, I would simply like to add that, since 2010, we have elevated ourselves from a poor and exposed country that was reliant on outside help to the ranks of a stronger country pursuing its own path that has earned respect and recognition. I believe it is important to briefly mention the close relationship that exists between economic success and national self-esteem and self-awareness in Europe today. It is irrelevant whether we like it or not – well, in fact, it is not irrelevant but this does not matter now – that the world, in particular, Europe measures itself based on its economic growth in a given year and is only able to speak of happiness and advancement in terms of consumption and production figures. It does not matter whether we like this or not because this is the world we live in now. If a country, a nation wants to reinforce its national identity, to enhance its prestige and to increase its self-esteem, it needs economic achievements as well. In the modern world, these two things are strongly related. It is very difficult to strengthen self-esteem and national identity whilst explaining why we are doing poorly from an economic point of view. And how much easier it will be – you will see – in the next few years to reinforce our self-esteem and national identity if we are able to say: Ladies and Gentlemen, you may look upon Hungary as a good example. It is not yet Germany but as regards its growth trends, you may see that this country heaps results upon results, and if everything goes well, we may be able to regain our former leading positions within the region within one to two years. How different it will be to proudly speak of ourselves as Hungarians! Even if these facts, our economic results, count for nothing in the eyes of some of us. But they do count for something in the modern world and have their significance. Therefore, the most I can offer for your work, in contribution to the reinforcement of Hungarians living in scattered diasporic communities, is a positive, successful and dynamic Hungarian economic policy and a Hungary that also earns distinction in the field of the economy; a strong motherland, if you like. I sincerely hope that the attraction of a strong motherland, the radiation of a strong Hungary, will also be much more perceivable for Hungarians living in scattered communities than when Hungary is struggling for its day-to-day survival in the economy.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

This serves as satisfactory grounds for believing that when we speak of a rising nation, a consolidating Hungary and a Hungarian nation gaining in strength, it is a realistic assessment.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

There is one other thing that may be worth mentioning because, beyond the general approach, there are also specific affairs that you will be required to discuss during the course of today. There is, of course, no point in talking about dual citizenship because we have already discussed it. There is also not much point in talking about expedited naturalisation because that, too, appears to be going to plan. What we should, however, talk about is that we have launched an experiment under the title Kőrösi Csoma Sándor Programme. We believed that this was a good programme. We believed so also when we launched it. I believe that it was also unanimously endorsed at the government meeting at the time. However, I would rather be cautious as we have already seen failed political programmes and experiments that were initially based on the right premise. This is why we decided a year ago that we should launch this programme with the participation of 50 people. Our assessment is now complete, and you will, no doubt, make your own contribution to this assessment as a result of this meeting today. The Hungarian Government will discuss the evaluation of this programme this afternoon; in actual fact, I am going to the cabinet meeting straight from here. The proposal is to the effect that the programme was deemed worthy of continuation; furthermore, there is a good chance that at the end of the cabinet meeting, we shall have doubled the programme; both in terms of funding and the number of people involved.

Ladies and Gentlemen, This is where we stand today, more or less. As Prime Minister, it is not befitting for me to make electoral announcements at such a pan-national meeting; yet, while I do not do this, I would like to remind you that it is very important that this process should continue. And as we live in a democracy, the Hungarian people will have to decide on how we should continue. The Hungarian people should be construed today as a broader term when it comes to political decisions than before as the next parliamentary elections will be a pan-Hungarian national decision. I would like to ask you to urge and to encourage Hungarians living in scattered communities to find ways – which is not difficult from a legal point of view – to rejoin the nation’s blood circulation also in a constitutional sense, to register and to take part in the next elections in Hungary because it is our joint responsibility not to squander all the results and all the opportunities which we have succeeded in creating for the Hungarian nation with extremely hard work and relentless labour in the last three years.

I rely on your support as you may continue to rely on the support of the Hungarian Government and my personal support.

Thank you for your attention.

(Prime Minister’s Office)