2024. március 28., csütörtök

The Hungarian government’s decision proved to be correct

Interview with Andor Deli

Serbia has gotten way closer to opening the 23rd and 24th chapters of joining the EU, in which Andor Deli, delegate of the European Parliament, a Fidesz EPP Group member, originally a representative of the Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians in Brussels, had a big part. The politician from Vojvodina had a big role in working on the modification proposal of the report about Serbia. He came home to Novi Sad for a couple of days, and we took the opportunity to ask him about the work within the EP, the legislative procedures, the migrant and refugee question, the sustainability of the Schengen Agreement, the politics behind the handling of the refugees and about the upcoming elections in Serbia.

The EP has recently accepted the newest report about Serbia. In relation to previous years, is it better or worse, which are its pivotal points?

Andor Deli (Ótos András felvétele)

Andor Deli (Ótos András felvétele)

- We debated about Serbia’s report for this year in a much calmer atmosphere, and the document got accepted in such an environment. Its reception was more positive than the previous one, though some things got repeated in it, which a lot of delegates have noticed. Furthermore, it caught their attention that some points have not really moved in any direction, of course, all the while having in mind that some things cannot get solved that easily, such as the economical reform or the fight against corruption. These things take time. You cannot expect a miracle in a year. We perceived as very positive that some things have been put into motion, with the comment that what got started should also be finished as soon as possible. For example the freedom of speech or the harmonization of external politics. The latter referring to the external politics towards Russia. The joint military exercise was our biggest concern, it did not have a good reception within the EU.

From the point of view of law, the judicial and legislative reforms should be kept in sight and hastened. Public administration reforms seem to be well on track, the human and minority rights are most important to us, and are the cardinal parts of the report. We dealt with these questions in a separate paragraph, and considered a huge success that we could point out, for example, that the law and funding of national councils should be harmonized as a top priority. At the same time, their scope of power should be defined too, so that they may work with more productivity. The national council elections were in 2014, we are almost at the half of their mandate, and still not much has been settled, as we have hoped for. It would be catastrophic for the national councils not to know their full radius of power by the end of their mandate.

“Those who were the most against the gate last autumn, are now one by one building gates of their own.”

The minority action plan appeared as a topic. It was noted with great satisfaction that a huge step has been made, after the discussions in the Parliament, already the following week, the final version of the minority action plan was presented to the member states. Things were moving forward steadily. This will hopefully lead to the acceptance of the 23rd and 24th chapters under the Dutch presidency. The Hungarian government supports the work on these chapters, and the Hungarian Ministry of External Affairs, as well as we in the EU institutions, are giving Serbia all the help they need.

Your fraction made a number of modification proposals to the text, why did you feel the need for them, have you succeeded in reaching your goal?

- Yes. We decided within the Fidesz delegation that we would submit modification proposals, first and foremost regarding minority and legislative issues, wanting to improve the text, all of which were accepted by the writing party, and were later on verified by the foreign committee. The final version had most of our proposals in it. We had two goals. We wanted to show our approval to the Serbian government for the steps made so far, and also to hasten and incite further work, which we thought of not as mounting pressure, but were profoundly convinced that both the citizens of Serbia, as well as our collective, would only gain from opening the new chapters, not to say that European legislative standards would appear in the Serbian system. Everyone would profit form that. If the chapters are opened, we would move forward with EU integration and this would be profitable for the citizens, the minorities, to us Hungarians from Vojvodina.

What do you think about the work of the EP in the last year? Which were the most important decisions?

- When I started my mandate in the summer of 2014, everything seemed quite calm, but later on things sped up. Last spring the Greek Euro crisis, then the migrant issue. Every European institution was dealing with these problems, and so the EP as well. There were a lot of discussions and debates in the EP. I have to say that the EP mostly supports the standpoint of the commission concerning these issues. The EP worked on hastening the proposed solutions. Some member states criticized the suggested proposals, so in no time, groups formed within the EP. It was up to our fraction to decide which would support the decisions of the commission and with what kind of vehemence. Within the EPP Group, and thinking of the Visegrád Group, a realistic point of view was sustained, which materialized as a mature analysis of the commissions actions. Obviously, the commissions work concerning the strengthening and protection of the outer borders had to be hastened. This was pointed out numerous times by the Fidesz delegation and my colleagues. It was interesting to see that the EP turned into an arena of different standpoints. This was a drawback for cooperation and for reaching decisions.

To which extent does the migrant crisis define to work of the institution? What problems have you noticed within the EP, in what do the fractions mainly differ?

- The fraction leaders had a really hard time, as everyone tried to stand by their rigid viewpoints. First and foremost the left wing and liberal fractions were the ones who pushed the commission to relocate the quota system, a standpoint which by the end was scarcely supported by the EPP Group and the center-right. Presently, it can be barely sensed in the center-right that this relocation would have some positive outcome, as we know on the basis of gathered data, that from the planned 160 000 refugees, only 497 got relocated. This proved that the solution was not viable, and the commission did not fail to point out on numerous occasions, that this was the fault of particular member states, and their lack of cooperation. I do not think this was the only problem, from the start the refugee distribution plans were wrong, which was proven by the recent report of the commission. It became apparent that only a fraction of the plan came into realization in half a year’s time.

Are they afraid for the sake of the Schengen Area in Brussels? Some quite devastating news have come to light.

- The freedom of movement and the freedom of trade has become a well-known lifestyle to EU citizens. It is normal that some people do not even have passports, as they can freely travel with their IDs, they require one only if they travel out of the EU. Now, with the migrant crisis, a new need has arisen, most recently on the Austrian – German border, before that on the Austrian – Slovenian border, stricter measures were taken, which endangers ordinary lifestyle. More and more started thinking that the migrant crisis will erase EU life. Movement of not only people, but goods got limited. Let us say that a Dutch company does not need a big stockpile, because the necessary items arrive in a days time from Slovakia. If we are talking about assembling products, if the needed goods arrive on time, then productivity expenses decrease. But, if because of border controls the freedom of trade is limited, that could lead to billions of loss. According to some calculations, each hour for a truck on the border costs 50 EUR. The EU economy would face dire consequences if the Schengen Area collapsed.

What are today’s opinions about Hungary’s migrant politics – we know that the gate caused an uproar from most of the politicians. Is it true, that Serbia’s actions are regarded with respect within the EU?

- The decision of the Hungarian government proved to be right, as we could see it work in practice last summer and at the beginning of autumn. We could say that those who were the most against the gate last autumn, are now one by one building gates of their own. Let us just take Austria. The Hungarian government decided right, which was also later on acclaimed by all, the endeavor to protect the Dublin and Schengen System by precisely registering the migrants got applauded.

Was the Hungarian government right?

- Yes, they were right, and other Western politicians were forced to accept that fact. The results were visible, while the open door politics proved to be catastrophic. It gave a hard time to all of the countries on the migrant line. You can see everyone coming to their senses, be it the German home affairs, or anything else, criticism towards the government can be heard from all sides.

How did they regard Serbia’s work concerning the migrant issue?

- Serbia got excellent feedback, both from the commission and the EP. Most importantly, Serbia never failed to stress that they are prepared to adhere to EU expectations, the EU just has to define these expectations already. I feel that Europe owed, and even now owes us these expectations.

What do the preparations for the Serbian elections look like from Brussels?

- It is Serbia’s right to hold elections whenever they want, be it extraordinary or not. What was stressed on the discussions, and backed by the Serbian part, is that hopefully these elections will not slow down the procedures for integration, the momentum of the last half year will not diminish, and will open up new chapters of negotiation. It is already visible that under the presidency of the Slovak government, which will be in the second half of 2016, much more stress will be given to expansion. The European integration progress of the Western Balkans countries will be on agenda.

What can the Hungarians in Vojvodina expect from the elections?

- We have accomplished a lot since 2014, a lot of important decisions were made, this great process started with the approval of our dual citizenship, which has built a political collaborative, a momentum which can be felt today. One of the examples is the EP national list, where I am. The Hungarian government’s decision from last November, to support the economic development with 54 billion Forints, gave excellent results and proved the presence of overall politics. We can see this in the opening of local offices, which are getting crowded with interest. I think this will not only benefit the Hungarians in Vojvodina, but if successful, will turn into good practice within the Carpathian Basin. Transcarpathia may be looking forward to a better future with this. I think this is the embodiment of overall politics, political collaborative and the sense of being one nation. This unity will have visible results for the Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians on the forthcoming national, regional and local elections.