All Animals Are Equal

Heated, professional arguments, spectacular presentations, sharp Austrian experts - these were our expectations. Instead, there were only two sentences repeated from time to time by the Austrian company: 1. ‘The establishment is in accordance with all EU regulations'. 2. ‘This is the most appropriate location for the combustor.' But let's start with the beginning of the story. The mentioned public hearing, which was expected to be a debate between the residents, the experts and the company on the proposed combustor in Heiligenkreutz, was held on 14th of May. It was organised by the Hungarian Ministry, taking into consideration the Espoo Convention On Environmental Impact Assessment. There are hardly any more official events of the environmental authorisation process.

Pronas (a non-goververnmental organisation) mobilized its members, the residents of the city and some independent experts. An hour before the program began, from the top of the school building, where the program was held, there could be heard drumbeats, demonstrating the importance of the event. Apart from the 350 local residents, representatives of the authority, the national park and the Hungarian parties' politicians being in charge of environmental fields gathered together. According to the rules of the procedure, the residents had to indicate in advance if they had a question, giving their names and the organisation they were representing. The forum was opened by Attila Bencsics, the local inspectorate's head of department, who described the Espoo Convention. After that the Austrian partner described the proposed project. The whole thing started to look at bit fishy at this point. The minimalist presentation, the lack of relevant information and the speech that lasted for about 7 minutes foreshadowed the Austrian attitude: they hadn't arrived for a debate. However, the key sentence came at the end of the presentation: the public hearing did not have any effect on the procedure.

BEGAS tried to act accordingly. The residents had numerous exact and professional observations but the company repeated the previously heard sentences: the combustor is in accordance with all EU regulations and that is the most appropriate location for it. After the residents' 10 questions, the head of the Őrség National Park and the experts called upon by the town took their turn by asking some other questions, demanding for exact facts and numbers in the answers. The audience anticipated that they would be taken more seriously, but the answers could be taken for granted, based on the ones heard previously.

At this point, Zoltán Woki, the head of Pronas, getting fed up with the airy ‘questions and answers' game, said that the company had earned a black mark with its answers. He stated, he would ask a question only on condition that it would be answered by the management of BEGAS. He asked Rudolf Simandl, the sales manager to give an answer for his question. Woki explained that in Hungary almost everybody was against the combustor: the Head of State, the Prime Minister, the Government and the Parliament, the Secretary for Environmental Protection, the General Assembly of Vas County, the residents of Szentgotthárd and 37 settlements of the area. He recalled 50 demonstrations of the previous year, the 10.000 signatures, protesting against the establishment. ‘What else do you want? Don't you think that if the proposed investment comes to realization, the Austrian-Hungarian relationship decays even further?' he asked finally. Unfortunately, Mr Simandl didn't give a satisfactory answer, he repeated the well-known clichés.

Numerous other questions arose. Where does the waste come from? How is it possible that there are different ranges of plants named by the Hungarian and the Austrian experts? What about the depreciation of land and buildings? Why weren't other locations examined as alternatives? The answers were always short and meaningless. The aim of BEGAS was to seriously undermine the importance of the public hearing. It treated the arguments of the residents and even of the authorities, as if they were of imbeciles.

However, the residents held on and they would have done so even further, but the Ministry's moderator suddenly initiated the closing of the public hearing, instead of the previously agreed ‘second round'. So, it was closed, in spite of the protesting residents' and NGOs' intentions. Finally, the Assistant for Mayor of Szentgotthárd asked whether it's true that there are municipalities of Burgenland among the owners of BEGAS. In this case, their impartiality is questionable in the process of authorisation, since they give a license for themselves. No answer given, but nervousness could be seen on the faces of BEGAS representatives.

I have taken part in many public hearings and I have encountered the proud attitude of several companies. However, this was the most humiliating event I have visited. Not only were the residents, as usual, considered to be imbeciles, but the representatives of Hungarian authorities as well. By all means, I was happy to see that the attitude of the Austrian company shocked both the Hungarian authorities and parties. This may bring Hungarian unity. We will need it, since as it seems, even in the EU, ‘some animals are more equal than others'.

Translation: Bea Berta
Proof-reading: Bev Lovatt