Against the Treaty: The EC has its own political agenda – Minister János Bóka

Join State Secretary Zoltán Kovács for a candid discussion with a true Brussels insider, Minister János Bóka, on Hungary’s 2024 EU presidency, the MFF review, and an overly political European Commission in the latest episode of The Bold Truth About Hungary podcast.

Follow us on Apple Podcasts:
https://apple.co/3D3tsh6

On Spotify:
https://spoti.fi/3D7RnvQ

On Google Podcasts:
https://bit.ly/3VShYFX

Welcome to the latest episode of uh the Bal truth of Hungary our podcast uh today’s guest is uh it’s my honor to be uh able to talk to him actually first time uh on this show is Yan bua who’s the new Minister for European Union

Affairs and as a matter of fact he’s got another title and function uh the uh perplexing and uh mysterious uh function of Sherpa um I believe we shall start our discussion and conversation today from that perspective uh the dust is starting to settle after the uh latest uh European Summit last

Week uh there’s been much mishmash but very obviously some very serious disputes in the background uh why don’t you tell me and the audience something about uh the main topics and not only from the perspective what we have already heard in the news but maybe something from behind how it’s work in

In preparation what’s the role of the Sha and how you prepare uh the EU Summit or rather the Prime Minister for the EU Summit well that’s uh uh it’s a pleasure to be here and uh let’s start with the basics that uh Sherpas don’t exist and I

Was never here so they if Sherpas do their job right they are invisible because Sherpas they are not political actors on their own in a video game they are non-player characters which means that their sole task is to assist the prime ministers and the presidents and

To make sure that uh the leaders are in the possession of all the information that they need in order to make political decisions um that uh that being said Sherpas can play a vital role in facilitating decisions uh charting options making the connections and the networking uh networking in the

Background uh but uh their only purpose is to assist the prime ministers uh of course uh the European Council are prime time for the Sherpas this they are working uh Around the Clock before during and after European Council to make sure that uh everything is uh everything is under control it’s quite

Uh demanding European Council meetings usually start on Thursdays and end Fridays with a few hours rest in between u in this case uh we started at 3:00 in the afternoon worked uh uh around uh 1:00 a.m. and then met again at 9:30 Friday but this was uh this was a more

Relaxed European Council as far as the workload is concerned uh when we agreed on U on the current mff in in December 2020 uh it was was U uh it was several days and it was working without sleep and it was constant Drafting and constant negotiations so it was uh it

Was also uh physically uh very demanding but it’s uh but it’s fun so what uh uh what happens at the European Council meetings is uh of course leaders have a strategic discussions it seems from the outside that this is all about European Council conclusions sometimes it is

Actually drafting but when it comes to drafting then uh these European Council meetings have a tendency to be extremely prolonged because uh leaders don’t like the idea that they have to write and rewrite and coordinate and recordin texts so if sharpers do their job right leaders don’t have to draft European

Council conclusions the drafting is done in advance and they can use the time for strategic discussions now strategic discussions are usually conducted in a in a to the tab format which means that uh all leaders uh have their say depending on their character it’s it can

Be five minutes it can be 15 minutes but just imagine if you do one to the table with the 27 plus the president of European Council plus the uh president of the European commission that’s uh that’s three hours at least only one uh only one to the tab that’s not the kind

Of discussion we are having here actually that I can ask and you can react very easily I believe yes this this well the uh the T the t is one to the tab is for for 3 hours if it’s two then it can be 4 and a half 5 and maybe

Even more and if they revisit certain issues they started uh in the meeting room and they continue during uh dinner this could even uh this could even go longer so preparation preparation is key and of course uh negotiations and discussion they usually don’t take place in the planner room they take place in

The corridors they take place in the delegation rooms they take place uh during uh during dinner uh it um us usually it is the perception that sherpers know what’s actually going on during the European Council this is uh this is usually the case but in the meeting room on the leaders are allowed

And the delegations know what happens in the room through what we call antii reporting anes are the right hands of permanent representatives in in Brussels and U the representative of the Secretariat of the council reports to the antii orally what happened in the meeting room and anti is report back to

The delegations so we only have H secondhand information what’s going on in the meeting room sometimes we don’t even have that because uh uh very confidential discussion sometimes take place with leaders only with no phones allowed and no antich reporting so this is um uh this is like uh FK art we have

Uh we have a several reiterations what happened in the meeting room and we compare notes with other delegation and sometimes two or three parallel scenarios come out what actually happen in the meeting room and this is what we have to manage at the end of the day

The media and I believe public opinion therefore tends to understand or interpret what’s going on at the European Summits and in among the European institutions in a very simplified or simplifying manner uh this is a very complex system uh in that complexity uh it’s uh it can be very misleading actually to interpret

Something uh negative or positive or clearly negative or clearly positive like in the case of our prime minister and Hungary stance on certain issues um can we come back on a couple of issues because in many respect we we’ve seen and we know uh from briefings domestically and from the news coming

From Brussels that this uh Summit was rather a preparatory or an introductory Summit for the end of the year and that is the December upcoming European Summit which is going to make or propose some decisions and that is some U uh elements of policymaking and strategic uh uh road

Maps that are going to guide the European institutions for a while what was happening from that perspec well indeed this European Council was more like a preparatory meeting for the December European Council it seems that before the end of the year we need to make some crucial

Decisions uh maybe on the revision of the mff if it ever takes place on on our strategy on Ukraine on uh enlargement on migration uh on economic governance and other economic issues and uh the discussions last week went uh along these lines but uh no specific political

Decision on any of these issues was taken B basically leaders started to discuss all these issues without the intention and without the possibility of agreeing uh by the by the end of European Council so there are number of lefts sorry for interrupting is is it because uh many of the issues now are

Being not simply prepar but sometimes decided on lower levels or different formats the European institutions or uh because uh as you suggested and my question suggested this is only the Preparatory phase to make final decisions on certain issues well the European institutions have a tendency to

Uh to keep issues as low as possible and uh uh prevent issues coming to higher or or the highest political level if it is at all possible so basically the institution including in Council working groups and at the level of cor the permanent representatives in in Brussel

They try to sort out as many issues as possible on a technical level in order to relieve the leaders from from the burden but in some cases this is simply not possible the MF review is a very political decision enlargement is a very political decision uh Ukraine strategy

Is a is a political decision and if leaders don’t give political guidance uh to the technical level they cannot sort this out we can pretend that uh diplomats and permanent Representatives discuss this for for days and weeks without end but no political decision will come out of this because they need

Guidance from the leaders and then they need approval and I think this uh European Council was important because leaders at least gave some kind of a political guidance maybe it could have been done earlier and then we would be further ahead in the road but uh uh

Better later than never so it’s uh it’s now a lot clearer what leaders actually expect from the prepar bodies in the runup of the December European Council we’ll see whether we get there I I I see very serious political issues I see very difficult questions uh and uh I see some

Significant shortcomings on behalf of the institutions in the Preparatory work we’ll see delegating and pushing issues downwards comes with the with the danger uh that some decisions are made uh without full consensus which is the basis of uh the existence and the working of the European uh Union as we

Have learned do you believe that in light of what happened in Israel uh the terrorist attacks and in light of how the situation in the near East and in the Arabic world is threatening with some ignition uh and very obviously the consequences uh reaching especially the Western European countries because of

The large scale of uh migration for the past couple of decades can bring migration illegal migration back uh to the top of the agenda and top of the European institutions illegal migration and migration in general is already on the agenda I think we can I I think we can

We can see no because we have seen U an attempt actually at the level of Cora and the lower levels of the uh Council to make a decision not unanimously uh but by majority decision uh which is basically pushing the central European countries and some others actually who

Are resisting uh onto a path and into a corner which they never liked think about the debates dating back for the past eight years uh but definitely the Hungarian public opinion but I believe the European public opinion waits for something a strategy decision on uh on

The level of the uh of the European Summit this is clearly the uh the prerogative of the European Council to make strategic decisions and give strategic political guidance and the European Council operates on the basis of unanimity and I think it is it is best place to set the direction and it

Is its a treaty based prerogative and obligation to do this and I think it’s very important for the European Council to take itself seriously if the if we have European Council conclusions for example as regards migration when the European Council repeatedly said that the uh strategic orientation when it

Comes to migration and Asylum policy should be decided unanimously by the European Council uh then then the European Council should actually stick to it when uh when the European Council decides unanimously that there will be no midterm review of the mff then the European Council should take itself

Seriously and either stick to his decision or be very clear on what conditions and for what reasons this review might take place if the European Council doesn’t take itself seriously then uh no member states and no other European institutions uh will very well um the past couple of minutes testify

About the complexity and reality uh on the ground and behind the scenes in many respect but let’s talk about some of the concrete issues uh coming to the Hungarian issues at the end of the uh midsection of this discussion um on migration the Hungarian position for the

Past uh 8 10 years is clear um do you see any recognition or uh coming of recognition that this was a right stance uh regarding illegal migration do you believe that there can be a change in the attitudes and uh approaches on behalf of especially the big Western

European countries the K SCH uh and uh and other uh Proverbs uh not being used for the past couple of months at least behind us um and just think about the latest uh um Manifesto in the build uh tiung the other day um in in a couple of points

They were trying to reiterate what values German society and Germany carries actually in face of those migrants who arrived for the past couple of years how do you see uh migration as a main and strategic political issue coming back on the agenda I think

There’s a a clear shift in uh in in the direction the European Union is taking on migration and I think uh they’re getting closer in many aspects to what Hungary has been saying for for a decade now and I I think U the the focus is now

More on the protection of the external border it’s more on the external dimension of uh of the fight against illegal migration in partnership with third countries and on addressing the root causes of migration I’m not saying that uh I’m not saying that we are there yet and I see very uh very important

Political discussion and maybe political struggles ahead I think uh What uh what is not happening yet is the uh is the understanding that uh if it is not the European Union or it’s member states who decide who can enter the territory of the European Union then we don’t have a

Migration policy then we might have a social policy might have an integration policy we might have a number of policies but we don’t have a migration policy because migration policy starts with the basic assumption that we are the ones who decide to enters our territory and uh we have tools at our at

Our disposal to prevent those who are not entitled to enter our territory from entering and uh here there is a debate between member states whether the protection of the external borders of the Union on land and sea is possible at all and uh we believe that it is possible we

Believe it requires resources it requires cooperation within and outside the European Union but it is possible and necessary and if we come to this conclusion then of course the uh it it follows from that conclusion that the European Union as such should assist member states protecting their external

ERS and this is something that we do on behalf of the European Union in the interest of the European Union as a whole and we should receive adequate financial and technical assistance in doing that and uh not procedures at the European court of justice that prevent us from effectively protecting the

External borders um the very obvious question arises that there are some uh examples or frames Frameworks by which we could have measured actually a EUR common European policy building up and that is say take a look at Australia or the United States where they have already for long decades by now have

Invented a an approach to policing aliens and that is Third Country citizens uh wishing to come to uh these countries and continents um Define their legal status and put some order uh let’s put let’s use this uh word into this uh into this migration alien policing uh and other issues there’s no such

Initiative on behalf of Europe as we see it is still this PSO uh humanitarian uh um moral High Ground uh approach mixing with um security uh and external Border Protection issues why is it that uh a pragmatic uh Workforce Labor uh oriented approach has never taken route in Europe

I I think uh I think you have a very good point here and uh this uh this goes very deep in the structure of European integration it’s uh it’s the fact that by European integration we separated the decision making from implementation and political responsibility which means that European institution propose

Solutions for migration issues but they are not the ones who are implementing they might assist for example through frontex but it’s basically member states authorities who represent who Implement these policies and then of course member states political establishment will have to bear political responsibility for the success or unsuccess of migration policy

And not the European institutions so European institutions are in a very uh favorable position of uh uh conducting policym on from a moral perspective uh instead of uh seeing the situation on the ground and addressing issues on the ground and responding to the expectations of the of the electorate in

In in member states and I see this I see this discrepancy where governments that make m migration policy take political responsibility then this kind of moral approach simply doesn’t fly anymore and then we have if if this is the case uh if migration policy is made on uh from a

From a moral foundation and a moral perspective then we mix a lot of things together we we mix Asylum policy with the migration policy we we mix labor policy with migration policy uh we mix Border Protection with reception of asylum Seekers all these things get confused because uh uh if because

Morality has a tendency to mix issues of different nature together and adopt a uniform approach which is not suitable uh for Effective policy making and implementation but then uh the formal simple and logical answer to how that can be sorted out is very simple and that is all this should remain in member

State uh competencies and uh decision making rather than uh bringing in big European common decision which is never going to end well uh for all the countries obviously well what what what you say makes perfect sense one of the solution and this is what the Hungarian government has been saying that if the

European Union as a community is not able to address those issues then at least it should let member states address these issues by themselves if they can do this more effectively uh but I have still not lost optimism because another solution could be that European institutions and the member States pay

More attention to the suggestions and experience of member states who are protecting the external borders of the European Union and are very clear how the European Union could make their job easier and how the European Union could make Border Protection more effective I think the solutions are on the table

It’s not that difficult to see uh political uh political ownership and political commitment is needed and the adaptation and that is adopting yourself and your mindset actually to reality on the ground this is going to happen here in Hungary as we understand from uh the government’s Intentions by the end of

The year we are going to have a new uh Alien policing and legal approach to how non- hungarians and non- Europeans can stay and come to Hungary what legal status they can enjoy and so on probably there’s High Time actually for a revision on on behalf of Europe too but

Let’s come to other particular issues uh believe migration itself we rarely have this kind of uh um Common Sense discussions actually with others in Western Europe especially with the European Parliament uh and it’s clear that the logic uh of uh especially the European uh Parliament but also in many respect of the

Commission is very political and is a mindset which is uh connecting everything what is happening in Europe uh as as is being suggested talking about deals in the background and as we come to the revision of or review of mff or the Ukraine uh policy tool or toolbox uh

It seems to be that all the Hungarian relevant issues I like you to talk about seem to be interconnected let’s make that clear that uh in our mindset they are not they they are they are not we are not we are not the ones who make connections and uh I simply don’t uh

Don’t see how these connections could be made maybe I maybe I sound a bit ironic but that’s not because I want to be ironic that’s because the political environment makes it ironic what I will say but let’s say enlargement process enlargement process should be a merit

Based process where they are uh if the political decision is made that a country uh has candidate status then of course there are prerequisite that it has to fulfill on its way to membership they will there will be an accession framework adopted there will be chapters opening Benchmark closing benchmarks and

So on so how could you connect this to anything this is supposed to be a merit based process right so there’s there’s no possibility to make this connection like it is happening that the accession of Europe sorry uh Ukraine is being connected to the revision of mff and

Hungary stands on I don’t how could I mean if this is a merit based process based on objective criteria then how this could be connected to anything I fail to see that or if it comes to our famous conditionality procedure I assume that this conditionality procedure is uh

Uh based on concerns shared by the commission and certain member states there are expectations and prerequisites that Hungary has to fulfill in order to get out of this conditionality procedure these are supposed to be objective based on objective consideration so how on Earth could I connect this to anything

So I U so my my position is that not only Hungary does not connect these issues to anything I fail to see how these procedures could be connected to anything at all if they are really objective and Merit based processes but how then the absurdity of uh connecting Ukraine’s uh accession

Helping Ukraine providing financial assistance come together with the supervision of uh mff how where do you think the the idea originates actually that uh whatever we do with Ukraine uh should be part of the European budget that’s a a clear nonsense for those actually who have

Ever seen a state or even a cooperation of States uh from a logical and institutional perspective uh there’s clearly not simply a political intent but uh something else here well I I I would I would separate this question into three parts one is uh I think the

The the the origin of this U discussion making political connections between different issues uh the the origin goes back to the so-call the political commission the the idea that the commission that is the UN commission since the commission and now the F Theon commission has become a geopolitical

Commission which uh uh probably means that even more political so I could translate geopolitical being even more political or being more political on on a larger scale so here the the commission is not simply uh an agent of member states uh implementing the uh uh the Strategic political decision taken

By uh the European Council and the member states but it’s a it’s an actor in its own right it has its own political agenda it has its own political objectives that may or may not coincide with the political objectives of member states and then if we accept

This is the case then of course the commission will become a political actor it will make all the tools at its disposal uh working in order to get their political objectives it will make political connections between different files it will use the budget as a political tool to reach its political

Objectives and it naturally leads to the situation where we are where political connections are made between uh files that are not naturally connected and clearly it is not settled or confined by the treaty well it’s a uh I would I would say it’s against the spirit of the

Treaty the uh in this in this concept the commission is supposed to be the guardian of the treaty uh and and the treaty says that the uh strategic political decisions are taken by the European Council the commission uh uh the commission is supposed to uh uh Implement these uh political uh

Strategic guidelines by making a proposal along the lines and then uh the council will negotiate this with the European Parliament with the view to adopt a legislation but now the it seems that the whole political life of the European Union evolves around the commission as a as a political entity

That has that has amassed huge political and budgetary powers and is ready to use it political objectives this is this is how I see this what the second issue is about enlargement becoming a political process here uh since uh uh the uh beginning of the of the war in Ukraine

We see that enlargement has become a geopolitical project and not not not a merit based process based on fulfillment of objective criteria uh it seems that um the decision to enlarge the European Union eastwards uh has become a political issue regardless of the uh regardless of the uh preparedness of

Candidate countries regardless of the political situation regardless of the uh regardless of the status of the uh accession process itself but I think it’s a very dangerous path because uh if uh enlargement becomes a political process then you can advance in this political process through political means and not by fulfilling certain

Criteria not by adapting your country to the European requirements not by transformation of your country according to European standards basically you will be looking for political arguments and you will be looking for political protectors in the process and then the message for all accession countries is

That uh the focus should not be on fulfilling accession criteria the focus should be in presenting political arguments and looking for political protectors within or outside the European Union and if you are successful in finding political protectors then you can proceed in the enlargement process no matter what the situation

Domestically is and I think this is a this is a very dangerous path and the European Union should be very cautious on on on proceeding proceeding this path and and uh uh and finally the the third uh third issue that we we need we need to tackle when it comes to this this

This whole or political Mass whether whether it was the right decision to in in to begin with to link access to EU funds to certain requirements of political nature because if you do this do it at the end of the day if these requirements are not very clearcut and

Specific maybe in also in numerical terms if this is not the case this inevitably becomes a political process uh so what I see is the over politization of uh of European process is generally when it comes to the position of the commission enlargement in specific and access to EU funds and I

Think that uh this is U very much contrary to the spirit of the treaties as I’ve read it and very much hypocritical if it’s from the Hungarian perspective this is where I wanted to get actually regarding the Hungarian standpoint in which there’s no novelty I believe we’ve been very consistent in uh

Suggesting how we approach our conversation uh with the commission and that we are not simply ready to compromise because uh this is not about compromising this is about uh legitimate uh concrete uh requirements being fulfilled legally uh and uh behav Behavior like on behalf of member states and can be measured exact measures

Should be applied but by the three legs or the three uh uh major parts of the problem regarding uh the over politicization of the commission itself and the European institutions itself isest in that it’s not going to be Hungary or any other country as a matter

Of fact who is in dispute with the European institutions who are going to be the uh those who are thating who are stopping uh a compromise uh how that can be bried who’s in the position who should be showing more uh honesty trust and uh uh and sticking to the European

Values from this perspective then okay well I I would I I take two steps back and because from a Hungarian perspective if uh uh if uh uh we believe like I believe that the legal basis for all these conditionality procedure and other procedures that block our access to

Certain EU funds is legally not founded so the the simply the basics are not there um then the question comes from why do we participate in these processes in the spirit of uh of constructiveness and sincere cooperation at all so why why do we do this what is the purpose of

The whole exercise and I think this is what some institutions and some member states fail to see uh this all started in in a very precarious geopolitical situation uh uh after the uh after the co coid uh uh crisis the economic crisis and the war in Ukraine and now the uh

Now the crisis in the Middle East so in In This Very precarious geopolitical context I think it’s in the European Union’s interest to show unity and to show strengths within and to the outside as well and uh my consideration was that well if uh the unity and strength of the

European Union requires hungary’s constructive participation in the process then we are willing to pay this political price for the unity and the coherence of the European Union even if we strongly disagree with the legal basis of this whole procedure and I think this is Ely not sacrificing any of

Our constitutional and legal red lines and and and approaches to out conversation of course not any any any constructiveness and flexibility in the process is strictly confined by a constitutional framework and strictly confined by the Strategic political interests of Hungary this is clear but if we can play a constructive role in

This process which we did then why not do this for the for the unity of the European Union but Unity uh goes the other way around as well so if if we signal our Readiness to be constructive for the unity of the European Union then we would expect the same from the

European institution and from member states and I see that this reciprocity is not always there not always there to to say the least and uh if it comes to the question whether we uh whether we play the constructive role in this process and whether we fulfilled our commitments and whether the protection

Of the financial interest of the European Union is insured then of course the the answer is an unqualified unqualified yes so we are there the question is whether there is the political will and the political owner ship on behalf of the institution to recognize this to reciprocate this and

Do something for the unity and strength of the European Union You’ already mentioned that uh the commission should uh be and remain as it was designed for uh the guardian of the treaty it should be behaving and acting in an honest broken mode do you believe

The point can come that they can fulfill this role uh do you see the prospect I’m not going to put you the question actually when there’s going to be an agreement with the commission uh my perspective on this you know this as that it is not the Hungarian government

Who is not going to be in the position is the commission going to come uh to position and uh and environment in which they can say that all right we’ve uh done what was needed um in an honest broken manner uh guarding the uh the treaty we are done with Hungary at least

In some questions and then access to the money but is due to Hungary uh by the very definition of the treaty which is clear enough actually how it distributes what algorithm is being used to distribute the money finally can be accessible well I I think they should

And I hope they will what they I I think they should because uh uh they have enormous responsibility for the future of the European project and uh this uh this responsibility sometimes entails taking political decisions and taking political ownership of projects even though uh this would be unpopular in the

Mainstream Western media for example and I think that they should live up to their responsibility and they should take these decisions and they should take these decisions uh uh better sooner than later whether they will it depends uh it depends whether they will find uh

Uh they will find the courage uh to do that and but the most intriguing part actually of the behavior of the European institutions is indeed that uh their agenda is not simply self-driven and that is they are having their own political agenda but it’s many resp perspectiv is driven by pressures uh and

Um obviously intentions coming from the media landscape uh or being influenced by that uh we’ve seen that and we are seeing that and if we talked about the honest broker role let’s talk a little bit at the end of the discussion about the upcoming Hungarian presidency

Because uh we have seen for the past couple of months especially on behalf of the European Parliament a pressure political pressure mounting regarding the Hungarian presidency and uh um recently Michelle mentioned that even political and other major uh media Outlets started to talk about and questioning uh the reality unreality of

Hungary giving uh the upcoming and rotating European presidency well I I think that no serious person in Europe can doubt the ability of the Hungarian government the Hungarian public administration and the hungaryan diplomacy to uh to conduct a successful presidency of the council in the second half of 24 uh and uh nobody

Seriously thinks that uh the presidency of Hungary in the second half of 24 could and should be prevented so what uh what I see in uh in some institutions and in some uh some newspapers is basically U basically part of a of a political PR campaign uh against Hungary

Which has nothing to do with our presidency as such and it has nothing to do with our ability to conduct this presidency but it has everything to do with the uh with trying to portray Hungary as as a member state that is isolated as a member state that is

Incompetent as a member state that is that is not that is not European uh and of course it should be treated it should be treated as such uh it should be it should be separated from the presidency which I uh which I believe uh can be done and then these uh uh these

Political attacks should be treated as political attacks and should should be replied accordingly uh and I think this this we are doing and I think the the the the the simple fact that we will manage this presidency and we will manage this presidency well uh gives answer to these attacks that are of

Political nature we obviously are both um biased in this respect because uh you as a minister for European Union Affairs uh and your Devotion to the European project as you just mentioned it goes without questioning actually that uh uh it’s very high on the top of the agenda

Uh for you for the upcoming years special regard to the ongoing Trio which we have successfully started actually uh back in the first in the first of on the 1 of July and my assignment and government commissioner who is going to provide for the logistical uh and operative uh phase and communication

Phase to this whole project is uh is an assignment which um even if I don’t like it brackets I do like it uh I wouldn’t be going against so very obviously the devotion is there on behalf of of the minister the commissioner and obviously the Hungarian government and very obviously we know our

Priorities um we glad if you just mentioned a couple of them but before that coming I would like to come back U last time actually on the the question do you believe that there is a the slightest chance that there be a political sacrifice regarding this because of the pressure coming from the

Uh extremist in the European Parliament and because uh the commission’s political agenda can derail in in terms of not coming to terms uh with Hungary and other member states regarding some political issues and the revision of the M mff Ukraine and so on that that can derail and put pressure on the existing

And conventional operation operating mechanisms of the European Union I I think this is uh highly unlikely or or it’s it’s it’s close to Impossible if it would happen uh then it would derail the whole European project as as we know it and uh I think it would completely uh

Disturb the institutional balance within the European Union we speaking about the president of the council so it is for the council to decide who holds the rotating presidents of the council not other institutions I I think that uh this uh uh this would send uh such message to member states and and

Institutions that for symbolic political consideration everything is possible it’s would send a message that uh if uh there is a will there is a way which is exactly the opposite of rule of law as we know it that’s right and if it’s about the rule of law and coming up to

The expectations let’s uh have a couple of sentences about the priorities and Main uh issues regarding the Hungarian presidency which obviously come together with everything we have been talking about because uh I believe your attitude the prime minister’s attitude towards the presidency is that it should be used

For the better of not only Hungary obviously but for the European Union we are preparing for a presidency that is going to not simply fulfill the honest broker role uh that is assigned uh for the rotating presidency but also to bring uh on the agenda those issues which

Are in reality uh relevant for the European Union uh we shall be and we are going to address them uh in a very honest Manner and put and prioritize uh the ongoing dosses and issues in that manner too and that is uh on a professional but also uh clearcut and

Logical downto Earth manner well there three three principles that we followed when uh uh when started to put together the presidency priorities one is that we operate in the framework of the trio presidency program that we adopted in the council and prepared together with the Spanish and Belgian presidencies the

Second we will be honest Brokers uh experience shows that this is not always easy and uh um um and uh not always straightforward but uh Hungary uh specifically prepares for that knowing that we will be watched very closely how honest Brokers we are and honest Brokers we will be and third

Of course uh uh we would like to focus on issues and U and initiatives that are especially close to our heart and our political thinking it is like uh it is like in Cuisine these of course these dishes are made in Brussels but we will

Put some Paprika in in in each of these es with some with some Hungarian flavor so we will see how much paprika we can put this and and when to put this in so this uh this is the this is the general thinking but of course my my feeling is

That paprika makes most of the dishes better than they are without paprika so it will be it will taste good at the end of the day as far as the priorities themselves are concerned uh the overarching priority will most likely be uh maintaining and enhancing the global competitiveness of the European Union

This is clear uh Global competitive is the basis of all policies that we adopt it provides the financial basis on which we can Finance these uh these policies it’s about uh it’s about jobs it’s about wages it’s about employment uh and it’s about investment uh I I think the

Economic foundations of the European Union and the global economic strategy of the European Union should be reconsidered in its entirety uh it should be adapted to the global challenges we have this will be the the overarching priority and all other priorities are somehow uh more or less directly connected to this overarching

Priority including addressing demographic challenges which is very important for us and Hungary made considerable efforts to put this on the U agenda which very obviously is going to bring in migration as a major Str issue course of course migration but uh but also social policy also family

Policy uh which is U uh which has been a focus of of our government activities for some time time now and even though most of these policies are and should remain in member State competence I think it makes sense to look at those issues from a European perspectives and

See uh whether we can find the ways and means to enhance these member states policies uh uh from the European Union uh cohesion policy is key we will be uh preparing the midterm review of the uh of the cohesion policy it’s important that we find a way for cohesion policy

And financing cohesion policy also in the next MF the next multi Financial framework and our presidency can play a vital role in that uh we would like to see the European security and defense policy strengthened this based on a European industrial base and we will have very specific proposals to make uh

To make this cooperation go forward and strengthened of course we will address migration uh along the lines that I I mentioned focusing on the protection of external borders uh uh strengthening the external component of migration addressing the root CES uh we have a consensus on this in the European Union

And we would like to uh work on this consensus and Advance it uh and then of course enlargement will come as a priority we have a very strong uh uh focus on the western Balkans because of our historical obligations we promised a membership perspective to the Western

Balkans 20 years ago and it would seriously undermine The credibility of the enlargement process if no tangible process is made in the region but then of course we still have some important decisions to make before the end of the year and this will set the political context in which the Hungarian

Presidency will operate also with a view of the institutional transition process that will be ongoing after the EP elections with the setting up of the new European Parliament uh the new European commission so the council will be the institution that brings political continuity in the system because the two

Other institutions the Parliament and the commission uh will be in transition and did get this gives us a political window of opportunity to make an impact uh on the policies of the European Union in the next institutional cycle very well there are so many things actually we haven’t talked about uh but that

Gives us the opportunity to come back to these issues at some point uh later this year I would like to thank for Minister Booka uh for uh today’s conversation and keep in mind that as it happened this time uh in the manner the minister has uh spoken that we always mean what we

Say and we always say what we Mean