According to Bernadett Wind, it is clear that the blackmail forced the universities to change their model

I obtained new documents: clearly they forced the universities to change their model by blackmail and did not receive any guarantee from the government – he writes in his Facebook post Wind Bernadett, which tried to look behind the change of model of the universities with a request for data of public interest.

The independent parliamentarian asked three universities, Pécs, Szeged and Debrecen, for information “because he wanted to see what information university senates were using to decide the future of higher education in Hungary in a few weeks.”

The representative received a reply only from the University of Pécs. According to the Rector of the University of Szeged and Debrecen, the materials are secret because “they serve as the basis for future decisions”, but the Rector of the University of Pécs provided detailed answers to Bernadett Szél, who summarized what he says about the document:

1. It is not the universities that have initiated the change of model. The University of Pécs wrote “At the initiative of the maintainer’s Ministry of Innovation and Technology, the management and the deans of the faculties of the University of Pécs held a briefing with the maintainer’s representative on 8 January on the possible involvement of the University in the process of changing the model “.
2. Palkovics dictated a terrible rhythm, writes Bernadett Szél. In addition, they wanted to finalize the government proposal in the week of January 18 before the Senate made a decision at the end of January.
3. The response sent to the deputy also revealed that ten days before the Senate’s decision, the university had not appointed a negotiating delegation: “The appointment of a negotiating delegation within the University has been requested. The negotiation process has not yet reached that stage. “
4. Bernadett Szél writes that nothing in the so-called “informative” material reveals fundamental issues such as the composition of the foundation’s board of directors, the rules for electing the rector or the powers of the senate. There is no guarantee of anything, everything is decided by the future powerful Board of Trustees and the Bylaws adopted by it. “According to the negotiations so far”, the rector can also nominate a member of the board of directors, but this is not binding on the board of directors. In the event of a vacancy, the majority of the Board of Trustees will decide on the new member. The election of the rector and the rights of the Senate will also be regulated by the Deed and the Bylaws adopted by the Board of Trustees. They can set the current powers of the Senate, but they can also “arrange” for the maintainer to decide on all matters, including the nomination of the rector. In Hungarian, the rights of the Senate can be preserved, none of them can remain, Szél interprets the answer.
5. Similarly, the future of the current university structure moves towards two extremes: “The change of model provides the opportunity to rethink the current organizational framework, but the current structure may be left to the discretion of the founder. Details of this will come to light at a later stage of the trial. The University Bylaws and the Organization and Functioning Regulations resolve these issues ”.
6. To the question of what is the guarantee of the free and non-influential operation of the university, the answer to the Fundamental Law was written.
7. To the question of whether the proportion of students studying with public funds is changing, the answer is that “We hope that at least the current level of state-funded places will continue to be available and that there will be related student benefits.”
8. The guarantees of a change of civil servant employee are also based on the fact that “in the first year of employment, the Kjt. rules apply. “The same goes for the anniversary award for the first 5 years.
9. The whole change of maintainer is a construction forced by net financial extortion, writes the politician, who says that this answer is the proof: “In the case of the institutions of change of model, there is a promise of a salary increase of 15 + 15% in 2 steps. ” Additional honeysuckle is the strategic financing agreement for 15-25 years with the state and the medium-term financing agreement for 5 years, adds Szél Bernadett.
10. Although the Senate resolution asks for more guarantees from the government, an amendment to the original text was finally adopted. The original said: “The Board of Trustees must take into account the opinion of the Senate when drafting and amending the constitutive act of the University.” Instead, it became definitive: “When drafting and modifying the founding act of the University, the Rector presents to the Board the proposals approved by the Senate.” According to Bernadett Szél, this is a fundamental change: the Senate resolution nowhere obliges the Board of Trustees to take its proposals into account when drafting the decisive Memorandum of Association.

According to Bernadett Szél, the Senate was in an almost blind decision-making situation and 34 yes, 2 no and 2 abstentions voted in favor of the change of model in Pécs.

I see that they nodded to the omnipotent patronage, which is not yet known, with no guarantee that their powers will be preserved, or even that they will have a say in any decision. What is certain is that the minister will appoint the Board of Trustees, which will then approve the statute and, if they are lucky, they will take their suggestions into account at some point, or not. This is blackmail forced self-surrender in my eyes, and it is a shame that in the midst of the epidemic the government is doing it with higher education, and it is sad that it has found partners for this in universities.