Hungary

Last update: July, 2016

Structural and personal changes have characterised the years since Fidesz gained 2/3 of parliamentary seats in spring 2010, ushering in the regime called the System of National Cooperation (Nemzeti Együttműködés Rendszere). The parliamentary elections in spring 2014 confirmed the absolute majority of Fidesz. Zoltán Balog remained Minister of Human Resources and Péter Hoppál became State Secretary in charge of culture. His predecessor László L. Simon administers matters of cultural heritage and major cultural investments as State Secretary in the Prime Minister's Office.

MMA, the Hungarian Academy of Arts, collects increasing resources and competences. Several buildings were transferred from state property into the possession of MMA, including the Műcsarnok, a representative Kunsthalle built in 1896. In addition, in 2014 the government announced the acquisition of a stately building on the elegant Andrássy út to house the offices of MMA. 244 regular and 49 "corresponding" members receive monthly allowances, from January 2016 HUF 260 000 and 190 000 respectively (about EUR 840 and EUR 610, which does not affect other earnings or pensions – the average Hungarian income is about EUR 790). New members are enrolled by co-opting. With a recommendation letter from a Hungarian or foreigner artist or art expert, anybody, including non-academic candidates, may apply for membership. In addition, MMA selects the Artists of the Nation from individuals over 65 who hold the Kossuth Prize, the highest official decoration. Artists of the Nation – 70 persons at any time – receive a monthly allowance that equals 23 times the official minimum retirement pension, in 2016 HUF 655 500 (about EUR 2 200).

"In order to strengthen national cohesion" and consider the history of the past 150 years to (re)build national historic identity, a new public research institute (Veritas Research Institute – http://www.veritasintezet.hu/en/) was set up in 2013 by the government – a challenge to the existing historiographic workshops at universities and the Academy of Science.

Although public financial cultural investments continue to be dominated by payments from the European Structural and Investment Funds, the issue of culture's role in the 2014-2020 planning period (in the Széchenyi 2020 programme, as the plan is called in Hungary) is almost absent from public discourse. The Partnership Agreement signed with the European Commission in August 2014 nevertheless foresees further investment into cultural heritage in the context of regional development, and socio-cultural services are referred to in connection to human resources development. Most of these are supposed to be financed through EFOP, the human resources development operational programme which represents over 11% of all EU financial support for Hungary in 2014-2020, in a 2:1 share from the European Social Fund (ESF) and the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) respectively.

Currently, the main cultural priority of the government is the regeneration of two areas in Budapest: the Castle District in Buda and the City Park. The royal castle complex has been housing cultural institutions since the 1960s, some of which—most specifically the National Gallery—will be removed to allow space for state representation and administration. A new building is to be erected in the middle of the City Park (Városliget, or Liget in short), alongside with some other new museums and an overdue overhaul of the Museum of Fine Arts. For more about these plans go to chapter 1.3.1.

Manda (see chapter 2.4) has created the concept of the National Filmhistory Park to be built in Ózd, thus reconstructing the abandoned industry zone of the town, hoping to attract tourists and provide locals with employment possibilities. The project is of high priority and its budget is nearly 1 billion HUF. The interactive exhibition will cover Hungarian and Eastern-European film history.

This information will be published as soon as possible.

This information will be published as soon as possible.

Last update: July, 2016

As of 2013, analogue broadcasting of M1 public television was discontinued by a decision of the National Media and Info-communication Authority; at the same time state support is given for those "users in need" (i.e. beneficiaries of social support) who are now switching to digital broadcast by necessity.

In 2010 the former national film archive was upgraded to the Hungarian National Digital Archive and Film Institute – MaNDA, to act as the main base of the programme under the same acronym. Besides the original functions relating to cinema, MaNDA undertakes the co-ordination of the digitisation of all means of cultural expression, from printed material to museum objects (http://www.kulturkincs.hu = cultural treasure).

Plans for the MaNDA programme include the establishment of a logistical centre in the city of Ózd in former industrial premises, where most of the actual digitising is supposed to be executed in the kultúrgyár (culture factory). The costs, estimated at about HUF 9 billion (ca. EUR 30 million), come mainly from the EU Structural Funds. Source: http://www.ozd.hu/content.php?cid=cont_501807bde873c4.82657862. The first 1 billion HUF was put to tender for the establishment of a "film history entertainment park". 

The Petőfi Literature Museum is in charge of the Digital Literary Academy, which keeps digitised oeuvres of contemporary writers who make their works available on the Internet by contract. Created in 1998, this unique endeavour had the works of 83 authors in 2015; 33 of members are alive, who each receive a monthly allowance four times the value of the official minimum wage.

MEK, the Hungarian Electronic Library, launched in 1994 on a private initiative, contains nearly fifteen thousand items (2016). Embedded into the National Széchényi Library, the project has maintained its community features.

The National Audiovisual Archive (NAVA) was established in 2004. NAVA acts as the legal deposit archive for the public and commercial television and radio channels that broadcast all over the country. NAVA plays the same role for electronic programmes as the National Széchényi Library does for printed publications or as MaNDA does for Hungarian films. The NAVA collection can be freely reached on-line from several hundred "NAVA points", terminals in libraries, schools, etc. registered within the framework regulated by law (http://www.fszek.hu/english/?article_hid=2027). Since 2011 NAVA is operated by an agency of the public media.

The on-going telematic development of the public library system was an important focus of attention and received significant additional resources from the EU Structural Funds during the 2007-2013 seven-year period.

Last update: July, 2016

While Hungary is very much concerned about the fate of the 2-3 million ethnic Hungarians living in neighbouring countries, significant efforts are made to stop or slow down assimilation within its own borders.

An Act on National and Ethnic Minorities was passed in 1993 (Act LXXVII), declaring minorities to be constituent elements of the state; defining their collective and personal rights. National and ethnic minorities – or, since an amendment in 2011, "nationalities" – are defined as ethnic groups that have been living in Hungary for at least one hundred years and differ from the majority by language and culture. There are 13 recognised nationalities, including the Roma or Romanies: in spite of considered as politically incorrect, the old name of Gypsy (cigány) is still widely used, both in their community and in official documents.

The proportion of all nationalities is estimated to be as high as 6-8%. In Hungary, however, ethnicity is considered a private matter: systematically collecting data according to ethnic background is not allowed under the Personal Data Protection Law. National censuses and elections of minority governments are all based on voluntary self-identification. In the 2011 census, 6.5% of the population declared that they belong to one of the minority groups. This however is not the exact rate of minorities as 14.1% did not answer this question while on the other hand multiple identities could be declared which many people did, resulting in a 107.4% total. In 1995, Hungary was among the first to sign and ratify the framework agreement of the Council of Europe on the protection of national minorities. Hungary also takes part in discussions which raise the issue of minorities within the political principles and priorities of the European Union. The Roma constitute the largest minority group and, at the same time, pose a major challenge to social policy, with important cultural implications. During the 2011 census, 315 000 Roma were recorded, i.e. about 3.2% of the population; However, according to the 2015 estimation of the European Roma Rights Centre approximately 750 000 Roma live in Hungary today. That is 7.49 % of the population. All Hungarian Roma speak Hungarian and only 17% of them speak Hungarian as a second language. Due to the very high correlation between those with a Roma background and crucial social problems (unemployment, poverty, exclusion etc), the fate of this minority group is among the greatest challenges to Hungarian society and government. On the other hand, the greatest number of Roma with full higher education in the whole of Europe is in Hungary, both in absolute and relative terms. Among the first 24 Hungarian members of the European Parliament, two were Roma – one of whom kept her seat in the 2009 elections, and was the rapporteur for the EU strategy on Roma inclusion. Hungarian Roma artists are especially famed in music, both individually and in ensembles. On the other hand, because of the indifference of the majority society and its authorities, and partly also due to the lack of necessary coherence inside the Roma community, plans such as the establishment of a representative national Roma cultural centre have constantly been postponed for decades; many times the plans failed due to planning objections by local inhabitants.  

National federations of minorities have consultative status, and often veto rights in relevant legislative matters. Their elected local government representatives in the villages and towns, and on the national level, have significant rights and growing resources – which, by nature, are to a great extent spent on culture. In spite of these endeavours – behind which sometimes manipulations connected to so-called ethno-business are suspected – assimilation is occurring and it is feared to continue. As part of the local elections in the autumn of 2014, 241 000 people, 3.1% of the total electorate, registered to vote for one of the 13 nationality lists. The Roma represented the majority with 160 000, followed by Germans, Croats and Slovaks with 41 000, 12 000, and 11 000 respectively. With the exception of the Roma, the number of votes in each minority decreased since the previous elections in 2010. The existing sociological and ethnographic traits of minorities could melt into nostalgic relics of culture.

The cultural rights and situation of the new minorities (immigrants) is a marginal issue in spite of those tens of thousands of immigrants who passed through Hungary towards Western-Europe in 2015. On the state level, there is no culture-based or culture-related project on the state level for the integration of migrants. As for inclusion policies or strategies, it is the civil sphere’s activity which worth attention here. The oldest and best known NGO for intercultural dialogue is Artemisszió Foundation, currently focusing on the migration crisis. In 2015, a new grass root activist organisation of volunteers was formed: MigSzol. Their language courses, regular gatherings include intercultural exchanges.

Immigration figures have been still very low compared to the typical destination countries of migration. Only 1.4 % of the entire population is of foreign origin. The immigration authorities recorded 140 000 foreigners living legally in Hungary in 2015, 206 000 in 2011, 171 000 in 2008. Since the overwhelming majority (70%) of the immigrants living in Hungary is ethnic Hungarians from a neighbouring state (Romania, Ukraine, Serbia, Slovakia), they do not constitute a cultural minority. Asians are the most dynamically growing minority groups, the Chinese being the largest new minority community, with a population of 13-15 thousand by 2015.

As stated previously, in the Hungarian context, policies for minorities always include concern regarding Hungarians living abroad. The enforcement of the Schengen border requirements, in effect from 2008, hampers cultural co-operation between Hungarians on the two sides of the border with Ukraine and Serbia, which remain third countries for the EU, and to a smaller extent with Romania and Croatia.

Last update: July, 2016

Social cohesion has traditionally been a strategic goal of Hungarian cultural policy. Strategies to involve culture in the struggle for increased social cohesion are traditionally centred on "közművelődés": socio-cultural activities and institutions – see chapter 6.4.

In the absence of a significant number of immigrants, social cohesion is conceived in terms of poverty, unemployment, a low level of education, as well as territorial inequalities. This latter is manifested in burning issues like uneven regional development, the accumulation of employment opportunities in the capital, and income distribution inequality. Statistically, theatre, cinema and classical music attendance figures show a particular divide between the capital and the countryside. Exceptions are when habitants in the countryside benefit just as much or even more from cultural advantages, libraries and cultural community houses. Data from the Central Statistical Bureau about household expenditure clearly indicate that inhabitants of Budapest spend more on recreation and culture than inhabitants in other regions. These facts were uppermost in the decision of the government to choose a provincial city, Pécs, to be the first European Capital of Culture in Hungary for the year 2010.

The National Social Inclusion Strategy – Extreme Poverty, Child Poverty, the Roma – (2011-2020) identifies the following key elements for improvement in the life of Roma: education, employment, health, and housing. "Culture, development of cultural and sport services" makes a smaller part of the strategy. "In conjunction with education, cultural institutions, museums and libraries operate a number of programmes relevant to social inclusion which serve to reduce cultural disadvantages and school drop-out rates." The Strategy focuses more on internet and digital access than actual interpersonal cultural events and gatherings organised for Roma and non-Roma. "They (i.e. disadvantaged children and young people) should acquire and develop their digital literacy in a sophisticated IT environment in libraries and should acquaint themselves with the use of electronic databases in an informal learning environment." Furthermore, "On a micro-regional level, the objective is to create community centres, social workshops and training centres which help the Roma enter the realm of learning and work." (http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/files/roma_hungary_strategy_en.pdf)

Civil organisations apply for regular funding from the National Cooperation Fund (NEA). Several large organisations, mainly connected to human rights and freedom and connected internationally, receive their basic funding from EEA Norwegian NGO Fund (https://norvegcivilalap.hu/en) for Hungary. From spring 2014 the government exerted pressure on this scheme, starting with a spectacular police raid on one of the offices.   Activities of a few civil organisations operating in the socio-cultural sector have been unstable since. Some of them fight for social cohesion via cultural projects.

In 2014 the new Cultural State Secretary initiated the Round Table of "Cultural Basic Provision" (Kulturális Ellátás Kerekasztala) so that quality culture reaches the broadest possible audiences all around the country with special attention for small villages in the countryside. The Round Table entails representatives of twenty expert organisations.  

The 2014-2020 EU-Hungary Partnership Agreement foresees the involvement of civil cultural organisations in rural development projects in the most underprivileged areas. The Strategy aims to improve access to good quality public services, including cultural services that help combat social inclusion.

This information will be published as soon as possible.

Last update: July, 2016

The decision taken in 2005 to nominate Pécs for the European Capital of Culture in 2010 very soon became the subject of widespread debates in the press. Key personalities of the project stepped down from their office one by one, and the main investments suffered serious delays and were modified consequently. The malaise was largely due to the disproportional role of capital investment (and the gaining of European Union resources) in the communication and in the actual planning, which has characterised preparations for Pécs 2010 almost till the end, at the expense of cultural programming. In the end, in the absence of most of the planned new infrastructure, and with an accent on the variety of offer, and the increased number of visitors to Pécs, the season is considered a relative success and satisfaction to the city (two-thirds of inhabitants of Pécs found the event successful). Studies about the assessment of the various dimensions of the impact of investments connected to 2014 Pécs European Capital of Culture were published in 2014[1].

Monitoring of culture had reasonable developments in the last few years, especially in a specific field. Five professional associations established a joint project for the registration of festivals, in conjunction with the ministries in charge of culture and tourism. In the course of the past four years over 400 – art, heritage, folklore, gastronomy etc. festivals – entered detailed information into the online database. Besides providing information and gaining visibility, the intention is to offer guidance for public and private sponsors. The next phase was to work out a complex rating scheme of Hungarian festivals, based on visits realised by monitors. In the past four years over 150 festivals received detailed assessment and qualification. (A report on the rating system of Hungarian festivals is available at http://www.budobs.org/pdf/Festrating_HU.pdf.) The Hungarian system was one of the models for the current pilot project of the European Festival Association (EFFE – Europe for Festivals, Festivals for Europe).

[1]    Tuka-Glied (eds): Pécs a többszintű kormányzás csapdájában (Pécs in the pitfall of multilevel governance)