After the election in Pécs, the local MSP fell apart and several centre-left members of the assembly started backing the new mayor. There's also word that after the EU parliamentary vote certain groups of socialist MPs will be joining the push for early elections. Is that what Fidesz are hoping for?

The endgame that the MSP have been playing for the last few weeks suggests nothing in the way of sound judgement that we might depend on going forward. Just consider the idea of the property tax or the 600 bn-forint [2.1 bn-euro] pact with the bankers. So what's developed here is a situation in which centre-right and centre-left, Christian Democrats and liberals, dissidents from the old days and Kádárists alike are saying, ‘We've had enough of the Gyurcsány-Bajnai era!' Even in 1990 we didn't see this kind of consensus of a significant majority of the community - I mean if you look at the support enjoyed by all the parties that were pressing for change then, even that was not as broad-based as what we'd have with the government we could form now. National unity developed in opposition to the socialists after the MSP became a pawn of the billionaires' club. They've taken control of the party and I hear that even a handful on the inside see it that way.

Why would we have early elections if you can't count on the good sense of the MSP and SDS to ensure a governing majority?

If we get the sort of backing in the European parliamentary elections that signifies a joining of forces throughout the country, then Fidesz must make it clear to the government and their friends in the business world that it's not worth making long-term agreements in a transition period because we will be rebuilding the Hungarian economy on different foundations.

You made an ultimatum after the Őszöd speech was leaked as well.

It's not an ultimatum, it's the will of the people. It's about people having had enough of feeling as if they're caught in a trap, of decisions being made with no authority, of mindless austerity measures being taken that cripple people and families. It makes no sense that the MSP should push for the property tax and for confused changes to the taxation system when we'll simply scrap the whole lot with the snap of a finger. Let's not forget: every time the socialists think they've come out ahead, they end up losing miserably. Of course, if you find yourself in a hole you can always dig deeper, you can always shovel out some more dirt, but then a hole-digging policy always brings you further down.

If we were to have the vote this year, according to the Constitution the next parliamentary term would only last till spring 2013. Is it worth the constant push to hold the elections as soon as possible?

I rule out the possibility that after successful elections we should not stay in government for four years. True, there is some internal tension in the constitutional system - this has to be resolved, if by no other way, then through the Constitutional Court. After the MSP have made off with the national wealth and people's life chances, it would be a sad thing indeed to have them trespass on the country's time as well.

Fidesz sometimes play with the time factor as well. For instance, you talk voters out of backing Jobbik with the idea that the new government will require strong support. However, the EP election is not about forming a governing majority domestically.

The EU vote is an early round of the parliamentary elections, it's a vote of confidence in the government. Every single victory, like the mayoral election in Pécs and the referendum on social policy, brings us closer to a large-scale parliamentary success.

Jobbik argue that the country gains more with Krisztina Morvai than with yet another 'no-name' Fidesz candidate. The MSP lose either way. 

The lesson of 2002 and 2006 was clear: the MSP have a chance of victory only if the votes on the right are split. If the right had voted as one in 2002 and 2006, we wouldn't be bringing up the rear on this continent, they wouldn't have destroyed people with their mindless austerity measures, and we'd already be paying in euros.

There's no other concern with Jobbik, other than their taking a few percentage points of the vote away?

When you govern you have to make comprehensive changes, but without careful consideration, without the ‘look twice before you leap' principle, you can't be successful in politics. Just because some fresh air in the house does us good doesn't mean you have to smash all the windows and then die of pneumonia. Politics with a pattern of extremism that has people stampeding into action can cause serious damage. The Jobbik chair has made it clear: whatever happens, they will be in opposition. We are getting ready to govern, so they are our opponents.

Are you distancing yourself from them now?

There are examples in European political history of the left setting up far-right organisations to weaken their opponents. After the change in government, our investigations will look into not just financial abuses, but also the role of the secret services and other such political fraud. It's at most a fraction of those who support extremist politics that are motivated by ideological and historical issues. The majority are more bitter than anything - if not desperate. The fundamental question for them is, Here we are, we've been working hard for years and we still can't make ends meet, and in the meantime socialist PMs in their 40s have become millionaires many times over? The cure for socially-based radicalism is not ideological struggle - as people of the Gyurcsány-Bajnai era have it - it's good economic policy, new jobs, law and order, in other words successful governance.

Why do you always target Gyurcsány and Bajnai? They're not the ones you're going to run against in the next elections.

The era we'd like to put an end to primes itself for attack again and again. That's why it's important to name the people who hold primary responsibility. This era was built on governing by deceit, falsifying information, selling out the country and assisting in Russian imperial pursuits. We're under attack even now: even though the Bajnai government insist they're only temporary, they say the property tax is coming - meanwhile they put the money they've received from the International Monetary Fund in the hands of bankers.

You're talking about bankers now for a second time - though it's the financial intermediary system the government are capitalizing, not individuals.

Banks have owners, they're the ones that are actually getting the money. You'll remember it was a full two months ago that significant sums were transferred to two banks thought to be Hungarian-owned. The point of that is debatable too because lending still hasn't picked up - but now we've had enough, it's not the banks we have to sort out, it's businesses and jobs. Throughout the world, people are saying it more and more: there's a strong suspicion that banks are using the billions they're getting from the state to cover up previous dirty tricks and to fill up their leaky funds.

Is that meant to be a warning to the OTP and FHB leadership?

On the contrary. OTP must be protected at all costs; FHB must also be protected, but within the limits of good financial sense. In fact, the crisis has led me to conclude that at least 50 per cent of the financial system must be in Hungarian hands. However, we can't permit another 600 bn that's been taken from people and families to be handed over to any bank.

Turning to the property tax, how is it that Fidesz have hit out against it so doggedly? Why not campaign on a reinstatement of the 13-month pension payment or of the family benefit?

It's through this that the prime minister showed the face of the current government when he said, ‘If you can't pay, you can move out'.

Then he apologised and announced that no tax need be paid on property worth under 30 million [the forint equivalent of about 106,000 euros].

But they'd already shown their true colours by then. We know them: they tell lies, they play dirty tricks, they create disorder. At the heart of the property tax is a national property register, and once that's off the ground the MSP, in time, will take their cut on every home, every building. As they had actually planned originally. We're a million jobs short in Hungary, and the most important means of job creation is cutting taxes. If we create a mass of new jobs, all the collateral problems of the economy - from the public debt to the budget deficit - will be solved. The first thing to do is to get the economy on a growth path, redistribution comes second. When the MSP levy taxes, it's this first point they're attacking.

It's as if the government had taken the idea out of the Vision of the Future programme by György Matolcsy et al.: that's where it says that a condition of easing the burden on potential employers is to hike consumption and wealth taxes.

Experts can debate, argue and make recommendations. Political decision makers make decisions. And we've made ours: the first thing the next Fidesz government will do is to scrap the property tax.

Two months ago, you called the Vision of the Future a recipe for even outdoing the MSP governments.

Because every contributor to the book agrees with radical tax cuts and is opposed to the government's having introduced 13 new taxes in four years. Naturally, there may be, and will be, a debate about what the structure of the taxation system should be - it's a politician's job to select the most appropriate solutions for the good of the country.

Why isn't it fair to try to catch income tax avoiders with a property tax?

The income tax is a completely suitable way to make incomes transparent, it's just that the level has to be set sensibly. Today it's worth it for a great many people to risk tax fraud and tax avoidance. After all, there's so much money you can make this way that it's out of proportion to the fine you pay if you're caught.

Do you stand by what you said a year ago in a closed forum to [political scientist] László Kéri's students that two years of crisis management will be necessary after the change in government?

The world isn't suffering from just one economic crisis anymore; it's undergoing a deep and thoroughgoing change. There's not a single country that will be able to get back in the groove; where we're going, there'll be a new groove. So it's not merely the financial difficulties we must get over. We have to get ready for a new world and we have to renew the country accordingly.

Sounds utopian.

But it's very real, it's knocking at the door right now. This year, China, with economic growth of 6 per cent, is already suggesting that a new currency should be used to replace the dollar in international accounts. And to lend a little emphasis to it all, meanwhile they've boosted military spending by 15 per cent. This example alone should be enough for us to see that the positions of the continents could undergo a fundamental transformation in as little as five years. The leading politicians of the world want to bring the international movement of money under scrutiny and to take measures against tax havens, hedge funds and other murky forms of speculation. Everything has a national dimension as well: politicians can no longer permit a considerable proportion of decisions that fundamentally impact people's livelihoods to be taken in the business world without any community control at all. We can't permit them to rob taxpayers with fancy manoeuvres like offshoring to sidestep taxation. Services that ensure a basic sense of security also require a more active state: basic groceries have to be taxed below five per cent, for example.

So there won't be any belt-tightening, and we shouldn't be afraid because it won't hurt?

The socialists build their policies on belt-tightening sometimes, handouts other times - meanwhile, the country slides back and falls behind. It's like being on a swing: your hair is streaming behind you, but you're not going anywhere. Moving but going nowhere, that's the politics of the MSP. Ours is based on creating jobs. More opportunities before you, greater security at your back - and the state acts as a partner in the efforts of the individual and the community.