All eyes on the MSZP as they begin to battle
referendum and show cracks under weight of unpopular reforms.
There are an increasing number of voices from within the ranks of the senior governing coalition partner, the Hungarian Socialist Party (MSZP), expressing dissatisfaction with the policies of the Gyurcsány government. The plasticity of the party’s internal power relations is increased by the fact that any criticism from within the party attracts considerable attention in the press, and the larger opposition party Fidesz is expressly attempting to draw attention to the possibility of the dissolution of the MSZP.
Internal debates & loss of voter confidence
Since the formation of the Gyurcsány government, both coalition parties have suffered a drop in popularity, which opinion polls show represents a clear low point for the Socialists, and for junior coalition partner the Alliance of Free Democrats (SZDSZ), whose support has fallen to one per cent, below the five per cent threshold needed to get into Parliament. The decline in the popularity of the MSZP means that only its most committed voters now declare their support for it, whilst the larger opposition party Fidesz has managed to both increase its support somewhat and to retain its earlier base. Nevertheless, there has not been a mass shift of voters from the MSZP towards Fidesz, and the majority of former MSZP voters have now joined the group of undecided voters, whose proportion – as is usual between two elections – has grown considerably.
Although it is clear that no conclusions can yet be drawn from opinion polls concerning the next general elections, it is particularly true of the MSZP that politicians are much more bothered by the results of opinion polls than voters are (see Deficit lower, page 10). This represents a serious risk, because if a crisis mood develops within the party, then the wider public will soon feel it. The MSZP is traditionally the party which regularly does its infighting in the public eye, and the influential figures in the party frequently send each other messages via the media. Recently, this tendency has become more prominent, as demonstrated by the fact that the House Speaker Katalin Szili, who does not hold a formal leadership position within the party but is clearly an influential figure, on several occasions questioned the credibility of the policies of the Gyurcsány government in public. In addition to the House Speaker, Socialist MPs who are opposed to the coalition agreement on the health insurance system spoke out publicly. The actions of József Karsai and Károly Tóth received considerable media attention, although they can hardly be regarded as indicating a general change of direction within the MSZP.
Adding to the trickle last week was MSZP vice chairman Ferenc Juhász, who stated that unless poll ratings turn around this year, the party should ease its unpopular reform policy. It is also significant that the MSZP faction in
The greatest problem for the MSZP, however, is the party’s wavering voters: the government still has not managed to make clear a schedule and programme which would again strengthen the Socialists in the run-up to the next general elections in 2010. The growing tendency to speak out in public and criticism of Prime Minister and party chairman Ferenc Gyurcsány from within the party are a problem in the sense that the crisis mood around the MSZP could stick in the public mind. The cases mentioned could create a vicious circle which could entirely overshadow debates concerning the performance of the MSZP in government: with the Socialist politicians reacting to the declining support as a crisis situation, making it impossible for the party to concentrate on governing, and in turn preventing the government from winning back voters through implementing and that the reforms are working.
The referendum and the PM’s position
The approaching referendum initiated by main opposition party Fidesz could directly threaten the position of the Prime Minister if the voter turnout and proportion of votes result in an incontrovertible situation: i.e. if a significant proportion of Hungarian voters, whose participation in referendums is traditionally low, and not only Fidesz’s core voters reject the visit fee, the hospital daily fee and higher education tuition fees. Although even then it would not necessarily be in the interests of the MSZP – purely taking into account political rationality – to replace the Prime Minister. In the event of a Fidesz victory the opposition would clearly speak of the total collapse of the government and its programme, which would render political stability even more difficult.
From this point of view the referendum, therefore, will also be about the MSZP. The party has promised discipline during the campaign, but the referendum will not end on the day of the voting and the announcement of the result. In the following period all figures will attempt to re-interpret the events in accordance with their own policies, which is likely to be a critical period for the MSZP. If the party tries to solve the problem of its potential loss during this period by speaking about itself, it will fail to engage voters, whose commitment will not be strengthened.
At the same time the referendum campaign also presents the MSZP with the opportunity to address its voters and to make up for opportunities missed during the last one and a half years, and to try to explain to voters what has really been the point of the government measures taken since the last general election. The MSZP, however, will only be capable of stabilising its own position if during the campaign it is capable of reaching voters, rather than just dealing with the consequences of a possible defeat and its own situation. But this is hindered by the fact that Fidesz – in a bid to increase voter turnout – continues partly to interpret the referendum as a decision on the fate of the government.
