TED7 – Seventh Trans-European Dialogue in Public Administratoin Cluj, 6-7 February 2014

1. TED7 – Seventh Trans-European Dialogue in Public Administratoin Cluj, 6-7 February 2014 Reforming local governmentin Hungary: A paradigm shift?György HAJNALCorvinus University of Budapest andHungarianAcademy of Sciences, Centre forSocialSciences, Institute forPolitical Sciencegyorgy.hajnal@uni-corvinus.hu

2. 1. The question 2010: FIDESZ-government – „Revolution of the voting ballot”. 1. Wholesale redesign of institutions: Entirely new constitution + all major laws, INCLUDING LOCAL & TERRITORIAL GOVERNMENT 2. Genuine new model for government & state-society relations („System of National Cooperation”) Is there a new paradigm of local government? If yes what are its basic features?

3. 2. Background: Outlines of thenewsystemof local government • Spring 2010: 68% of mandates >> supermajority. Swift elminiation of checks and balances. • Phase 1: New local election system. Reducing the size of local councils; eliminating personal overlaps between local and national politics • Phase 2: New system of middle-tier / territorial administration. „County Government Offices”: new, highly integrated, vertically strictly controlled, politically supervised central structures on the territorial level! Elimination of county self-governments’ public service role – take-over of public services + debts. • Phase 3: New system of local government. Extension of central (county) structures to the local level (198 District Government Offices);

4. 3. Doctrinalfoundations of the Good State From 2005: Preparation for governmental role – creating the doctrinal foundations >> G. Fodor & Stumpf 2007-2008; „Magyary Plan” • „Old”: • Neoliberalvalues • Rule of market forces, disregard of truepublic interest • New Public Management • Horizontalstate-society relations, statewithoutpower and authority • …Capturedbymulti-nationalcapital and itsadvocates (IFCs) • „New”: • Patriotism, (Christianity), and communitarianvalues • Rule of the Public Interest; markets and profit subordinated • „Good government” and „Good State” • „Strong state”: physicalcontrol+ (moral) authority • Bureaucracy+ hierarchy (vs. marketsand networks) No mentioning of local / territorial government whatsoever!

5. 4. Interpretations I.: Pendulum shift • „Old”: • Local self-governmentasconstitutionallyentrenched right of local communities; „fourthbranch” differentfrom (oppositeto?) centralstate • fragmented + hugetasks / ambitions • Small and decreasingcapacity / funding • Dominatedby / embeddedin local power relations • >> increasingtensions; „impotence” • „New”: • LG as an organizationalnecessity – „managing local affairs” • Tasksadjustedtocapacity >> minimized • Remainingoperationsstronglycontrolled / limited • Dominatedbythenationalpower centre • Most tasks and capacity „nationalized” / centralized

6. 4. Interpretations II.: A „good local state”? • …Design „on a white sheet of paper”: A good local state: • is efficient (amalgamation, economies of scale in services & administration) • is modest (separation of local politics from the national arena; small councils; limited office & pay; fiscal discipline & operational oversight by central state) • is substituted by centralized, uniform and strongly regulated public + administrative services (District Government Offices, schools etc. „nationalized”) • AND contributes to the ever-larger central state control by • eliminating local / autonomous venues of political & social interaction • eliminating political and financial „Hintergrund” of possible opponents (both opposition and government party) • centralizing the redistributiive powers and thus manifesting central power on the local level…