Deputy central bank chairman Júlia Király’s personal story of the 2008 Hungarian financial crisis

I just finished reading a fascinating book by Júlia Király, deputy chairman of the Hungarian Central Bank between 2007 and 2013, on her recollections and analysis of the 2008 economic crisis in Hungary. The book’s title is A tornádó oldalszele: Szubjektív válságtörténet, 2007-2013. The title needs some explanation. Before the crisis reached Hungary, Király was convinced that Hungary would receive only the side wind or half wind (or, to use a sailing term, beam reach) of the approaching tornado. As we know, she was mistaken. Hungary was badly hit, with consequences not just economic but also political. To use another sailing term, the country ended up “in irons,” meaning heading into the wind, stalled, and unable to maneuver.

The structure of the book is most unusual; it is basically two books in one. The first half is Király’s personal recollections of the six years she spent in the Hungarian National Bank. The second half is a series of lectures on the workings of the central bank, a glossary of important terms, and an account of events necessary to fully understand the main story. Király and her editor, Zoltán Farkas, who is responsible for the coverage of economics and finance in HVG, decided to turn to this unusual format, which was first used in Hungary by Péter Esterházy, the star of modern Hungarian literature, in Termelési regény / Production Novel (1984). The first half of Esterházy’s novel recounts the daily life of a factory. Its numbered footnotes lead the reader to comments by the “master’s secretary” on the life of the writer. One would think that such a division would make reading the book cumbersome, but this is not at all the case. At least in the e-book version, moving between the terms in bold and the explanations in the second half of the book is easy. So is accessing the more than 550 footnotes, which are a great deal more informative than one normally expects.

In March 2007 Zsigmond Járai, a Fidesz appointee, ended his six-year tenure, and the socialist-liberal government of Ferenc Gyurcsány was looking for a new chairman, preferably a more capable and less confrontational one than Járai. Two names eventually surfaced as likely contenders, Ferenc Karvalits and András Simor, and both kept their eyes on Júlia Király for the deputy post. In the end, Simor became chairman, and Király and Karvalits served as his deputies. The first half of the book is mostly about the work of these three people, who were responsible for saving the country from financial ruin in 2008. Because in 2008 the threat of insolvency, unlike in 2010 when the new Orbán government tried to convince the world of Hungary’s imminent financial collapse, was for real.

At the time of the job offer Júlia Király was in the middle of a research project which she was sorry to abandon, but a friend of hers with years of experience in the central bank cheered her up by saying that she can look forward to six boring years when she will have plenty of time to work on her project on the side. Shortly after they began their work, Karvalits asked Simor what they would be doing in the next year. The new chairman thought they might be able to get inflation down, which in March 2007 was 9%. By the end of the year it had fallen to 7.5%.

Király received an excellent piece of advice from an old high-school friend who in the interim became a well-known journalist and writer: “Write down everything! You must remember everything!” Thank God she did because some of the important documents that were originally intended to remain unavailable to the public for 10 years have since have been reclassified to remain top secret for 30 years. She also saved her calendar, which was crowded with meetings, starting at 8 o’clock in the morning and ending at 7 o’clock in the evening.

The book is chock full of information on many topics, and of course I cannot begin to give them the attention they deserve. I will concentrate on the crucial period between September 15, 2008, when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, and the end of the year when the National Bank could breathe a sigh of relief. The country had survived the crisis.

Although there were many signs of the gathering storm, the scope of the problem was totally unexpected. Then came October 9, when Király was in Frankfurt for one of the regular committee meetings of the European Central Bank. The plan was that Simor would join her the next day and that the two of them would fly to Washington for an IMF general meeting. While in the ECB meeting, she got word that nobody was buying Hungarian government bonds. BUX, the Budapest stock exchange, fell so rapidly that trading had to be suspended, and the forint plummeted. A state of “sudden stop” occurred, which means swift reversals of international capital flows and declines in production and consumption. It looked as if, by December, the Hungarian government would be unable to meet its payroll.

Plans changed. Simor had to stay in Budapest. Király, with a deputy undersecretary of the ministry of finance, went to Washington. And the Hungarian government began negotiating for a loan from the IMF. A “crisis staff” was created, which included Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsány; Finance Minister János Veres; Álmos Kovács, assistant undersecretary in the finance ministry; Gordon Bajnai, who served at this point as minister in charge of local government and land development; Sándor Csányi, president of OTP, Hungary’s largest bank; and Simor, Karvalits, and Király, who represented the central bank. They met almost every night for one or two hours.

Meanwhile, in the central bank itself, a group of “rescuers” was appointed, 20-25 people who were supposed to come up with ideas and master plans to address the crisis. They worked day and night. Simor announced that he is no longer the chairman of a bank but “a general because we are in a state of war.”

Miraculously, by the end of October, Hungary was out of danger. On October 23, The Economist noted that “the Hungarian central bank did exceptionally well,” which was naturally music to their ears.

This short description of the immediate crisis cannot of course do justice to this book. It must be read, and I do hope that sometime in the near future there will be an English translation of it. On the cover of the book Péter Nádas, another great name in contemporary Hungarian literature, wrote: “I read it holding my breath. It is truly dramatic. Please keep writing. Go and investigate further.” Nádas is not exaggerating. It is a book that everybody who is interested in the workings of central banks in general and the Hungarian Central Bank in particular should read. It is also an important first-hand document of crisis management.

I have been an admirer of Júlia Király ever since I first listened to an interview with her some time between 2002 and 2007 on Zsófia Mihancsik’s Sunday-night program Hétzáró (Week Closing) on Klub Rádió. She is unpretentious; even as deputy chairman of the central bank she bicycled to work. She is witty and has spunk. And she must be an excellent teacher because the second half of the book, in which she explains difficult economic concepts in simple terms, is beautifully crafted. Her book cannot be properly summarized because its most important ingredient, Júlia Király, is missing from the text.

♦ ♦ ♦

Júlia Király’s distinguished career began in the 1980s in the Hungarian Statistical Office. Before becoming deputy chairman of the Hungarian National Bank, she taught at her alma mater (Corvinus), was an adviser to György Surányi, chairman of the National Bank (1990-1991), and even served as an adviser to Fidesz on economic matters, especially on pension policies (1990-1992). She was on the board on several banks and in 2002 and 2003 was CEO of Postabank. As such, she was in charge of the bank’s privatization.

It was in 2007 that Király was appointed one of the two deputy chairmen of the Hungarian National Bank for a six-year term. Her term would have expired on July 4, 2013, but after the appointment of György Matolcsy as central bank chairman in March 2013, she decided not to wait and quit on April 8. In her opinion, under Matolcsy’s leadership, the Hungarian National Bank was heading in the wrong direction and, as she said, his policies “endanger the central bank’s prestige acquired over many years at home and abroad.” Her decision became international news. The very day of the announcement The Economist published an article on the subject with the title “Julia Király quits with a j’accuse.” Currently, Király is a professor at the International Business School in Budapest and an independent member of the board of the Belgian KBC Group.

Hungarian Spectrum had the privilege of publishing an article of hers in 2015 titled “The not surprising economic slowdown.”

July 20, 2019
27 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
sunyilo12
sunyilo12
July 20, 2019 9:04 pm

Dear Eva,

This is a fascinating topic and thanks for the presenting Julia Kiraly’s recollection of the 2008 crisis – it will be on my list to buy next time I’ll visit Hungary.
However, I have an uneasy feeling about the infallibility of the economic authorities like Kiraly in the light of the economics we have seen unfolding in the EU and in the US in recent years. Obviously, I don’t mean infallibility in a literal sense, however Kiraly/Suranyi, in Hungary confronting Matolcsy’s unorthodoxia, and, for instance, American economic luminaries like Paul Krugman confronting Trump’s policies, bear similarities in reasoning against the so co-called unorthodox/irrational/archaic economic strategies.
Yet, neither the Hungarian nor the US economy has produced the prognosticated collapses, albeit Hungary surely has fallen short of the growth of her neighbors. However much the outstanding intellects of Kiraly and Krugman appeal to me, at the end of the day aren’t these shining minds overrated in these matters of economy?
Knowing my insights into these topics are quite limited, I would be most interested to read feedback from domain experts at HS.

dos929
dos929
July 21, 2019 12:20 am
Reply to  sunyilo12

Sorry to pour cold water on your observation of the ‘non-collapse’ of the Hungarian economy… But were not for the EU subsidies and the mostly German car plants, Hungary would have negative ‘growth’… Hungary’s economy is on life support and anything but healthy. There are fewer and fewer professionals on every level, the future workforce is strangled by the primitive education system, etc… etc… Oh, I forgot to mention the stolen Pension Funds that kept this government alive for 3 years starting in December 2010… Finally, more and more people are leaving this country never to come back. And for the juicy economic statistics; the government employment statistics include those that work abroad…

sunyilo12
sunyilo12
July 21, 2019 2:12 pm
Reply to  dos929

You don’t need to pour cold water – esp if you mean to imply that I was trying to whitewash the Orban government’s economic performance.

Wholeheartedly agree the picture is not as rosy as they are painting it, but, you have to admit most prognostications of economic collapse (for instance, after breaking the dialogue with the IMF in 2010 or 2011) were also incorrect (just as incorrect as doomsday prognostications on key Trump policies – trade war, corporate tax cut). True, many of these policies come with brutal pricetags for future generations, but the white never seems as clean and the black may not be as dark as experts claim.

István
István
July 21, 2019 4:31 am
Reply to  sunyilo12

Dos already gave some important points of the state of our economy. And even with these effects the first years of the regime showed a recession. I didn’t look up, but from memory it was the exceptional harvest 2014 that the first time the GDP showed a plus compared to the year before – that means compared to the lowest level of course, even lower than during the years of the worldwide crises. Exactly during these early years of the regime the other countries in the region profited from the growth in western Europe, especially Germany, and took over. At some point combined the exodus of workforce and the growth of exporting foreign companies was that strong that the economy showed better figures, although of course many of them just not true, not only the workers abroad are used to falsify the actual state of economy.

Observer
Observer
July 20, 2019 10:24 pm

Just as sunylo12, I’d be also interested to see JK’s opinion of the econ developments after 2015 (her HS article). Even as I knew about the effect of the accelerated drawing of EU funds in the beginning of the new EU budget cycle and the remittance of Huns working abroad, I didn’t expect more than 4% growth. i was wrong.
Im pedimistic expect the decline of the growth has already started, etc.

tappanch
tappanch
July 21, 2019 4:46 am

July 15, 2019:
Orban shows up in a WizzAir flight from Milan, Salvini’s home town to Budapest.

https://hvg.hu/elet/20190718_Fapadoson_utazott_Orban_Viktor

July 19, 2019:
Orban appears as a tourist in Царское село (in the Tsar’s village) in Leningrad область (oblasty).

comment image

https://index.hu/mindekozben/poszt/2019/07/20/orban_viktor_oroszorszagban_nyaral/

He must have met Товарищ Пу́тин (Putyin= Putin).

July 21, 2019 8:27 am

Totally OT but funny in a way:
O1G’s spox has just written an article on how bad Finland is, no judicial independeny etc – worse even than Hungary! 🙂
http://abouthungary.hu/blog/i-bet-you-didnt-know-this-about-finland/
Our Finnish “minion” (sorry, those names are even more complicated for me than Hungarians …) might like to read and comment on it.

Observer
Observer
July 21, 2019 9:33 am
Reply to  wolfi7777

wolfi and all
If it comes from Orbán or his.minions it’s a lie, until proved otherwise.
In the long, loaded sentence the chief lying toad Zpox introduces one word to “prove” independent judiciary is nonexistent in Fin:
“judges are appointed by the … President of Finland upon the recommendation of the justice minister, whose pick depends on the conclusions of a SEEMINGLY independent body responsible for judicial nominations. ”
The whole system is invalidated because this body “seems” something else to Mr. CLToad! What a logic, what an iron-clad argument…

July 21, 2019 9:59 am
Reply to  Observer

Of course we all know that spox is spouting fake news, I just found it funny in a way that he uses Finland to compare Hungary with.
Maybe O1G’s honchos are still angry that Hungary has only rank 62 in the UN’s World Happiness Report – while Finland is no 1 … 🙂
The twitter sites of the Hungarian gov and the V4NA (I’ve linked to them often) are always fun to read or a reason to despair, depending on your mood – almost like Trump’s tweets.

Princess
Princess
July 21, 2019 9:37 am
Reply to  wolfi7777

The abouthungary-“article” says that “The pluralism of Finnish media is under grave threat.” and refers to this paper: https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/61138/2018_Finland_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y. When you read that paper, you see that its conclusion is that: “The Monitor identifies a number of risks for Finnish media. Most of them relate to potential threats rather than already-realized problems. Empirical research on many topics is lacking – making it difficult to assess how dangerous the risks truly are. Overall, Finnish media seem to be fairly healthy and pluralist, but certain issues still should be addressed.” Compare that to the conclusions it has on the same topic for Hungary (ref. https://cadmus.eui.eu/bitstream/handle/1814/61143/2018_Hungary_EN.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y): “The Hungarian media environment poses high risks to media pluralism. While there are formal legal mechanisms in place protecting freedom of expression, media pluralism is declining due to government influence over the market. This has been primarily achieved through legal/regulatory changes and market pressure, as well as through direct and indirect government interference with media outlets and journalists. The private media sector is increasingly dominated by oligarchs with close government ties. In the past year, the right-wing media in Hungary has been reconfigured and expanded with new owners and outlets that actively promote the government line. The… Read more »

Princess
Princess
July 21, 2019 9:59 am
Reply to  wolfi7777

As for the statement in the abouthungary-“article” according to which Hungary has better scores than Finland with regards to the judicial independence, I couldn’t find any confirmation in the document the “article” refers to (https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/justice_scoreboard_2019_en.pdf).

On the contrary. The scoreboards on pages 44, 45, and 46 show the opposite. Finlands has some of the highest scores, while Hungary some of the lowest with regards to the judicial independence.

Princess
Princess
July 21, 2019 10:31 am
Reply to  Princess

At least with regards to perceived independence.

Princess
Princess
July 21, 2019 10:10 am
Reply to  wolfi7777

The “article” says that Finland has a Supreme Administrative Court, so why can’t Fidesz have one too?

Does anyone know who will propose the judges for Fidesz’ admin court system?

In Finland these judges are proposed by an independent Judicial Appointments Board. It proposes the list of candidates and the Minister of Justice and the president appoint the candidates. (https://oikeus.fi/tuomioistuimet/en/index/lautakunnat/tuomarinvalintalautakunta.html)

István
István
July 21, 2019 11:37 am
Reply to  Princess

“The “article” says that Finland has a Supreme Administrative Court, so why can’t Fidesz have one too?”

The question contains already the answer…. Of course there are more countries with administative courts and nothing is wrong with specialised courts or specialised departments within courts, as long as they have a clear duty and – most important – independent judges. But in Hungary there are FIDESZ courts planned indeed….

What ever. If Trump is allowed to appoint a judge it is finest democracy. If this happens in Finland it is violating independend jurisdication, because Orbán and Trump are fans of each other, while the Fin government wants to speed up the procedures against countries violating the values of the union. Independent bodies are a nogo in Orbánistan, why should they exist in other countries?

Same about the media. In every country you will find an x number of companies owning a pretty large number of media outlets and many small ones. But where do you find 80 something % owned by government and governing party and where the rest is under pressure of the government?

Princess
Princess
July 21, 2019 10:24 am
Reply to  wolfi7777

The “article” says that the quality of the Hungarian judicial system has better scores than the Finnish one according to https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/justice_scoreboard_2019_en.pdf.

Quality according to the document doesn’t relate to independence contrary to what the abouthungary-article wants to make believe.

The qualiy related scoreboards are on page 23 until page 43.

Hungary has better scores in some boards, for example the ones relating to court fees and use of online publication tools.

The difference in scores on figure 36 is quite striking (Judges participating in continuous training activities in EU law or in the law of another Member State).

But again, these figures don’t say anything about the independence.

wrfree
wrfree
July 21, 2019 11:34 am
Reply to  Princess

When considering media environments each country will try to reconcile the ‘market’ with their form of ‘democracy’. A reading of the two countries’ analyses quite readily shows an issue with political interference and journalist independence in Magyarorszag rather than in Finland.

Essentially we can see that different ‘market’ environments breed different governing approaches in managing media. We can immediately see Orban country’s illiberal approach much prefers a ‘tighter’ market on dissemination of information/news, informing the public , setting agendas and how opinion is developed. The noose is always ready looking for another neck to tie up.

Something must have tickled Zoli’s fancy with Finland. Who knows? Maybe he cringed when looking at how they run their education industry. They care…alot. But telling Magyarorszag to learn something from ‘cousins’ is too much though. They’re already the ‘okos’ ones. They put another aspect to the act of ‘taking liberties’.

And it’s only done because they work only to tighten the media spigots. Magyar media as public waterworks: Water water everywhere but nothing to drink. And we can see why everything is so democratically dehydrated.

And would love to get the English translation of JK’s book.👍

Don Kichote
July 21, 2019 11:00 am
Reply to  wolfi7777

Maybe that’s the hanger why.
US President Trump is also campaigning for US rapper A $ AP Rocky.
There was a phone call with Sweden Trump wanted to pay the bail. The Swedes said their judiciary is independent.

https://www.spiegel.de/panorama/leute/donald-trump-will-fuer-inhaftierten-rapper-asap-rocky-buergen-a-1278275.html

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-sweden-usa-rapper/us-rapper-aap-rocky-to-remain-in-swedish-custody-trump-plans-to-intervene-idUSKCN1UE0PO

Parhuzamos Kapcsolas
Parhuzamos Kapcsolas
July 21, 2019 4:11 pm
Reply to  Don Kichote

Don Kichote, I followed that on Twitter, and Black Twitter is quite evenly split, with some invoking they should stand up for all of their members, even if the person they stand up for doesn’t do it for them, and with others (in my eyes, rightfully) saying that A$AP Rocky talks smack about black women, and frankly if you’re a chauvinist, you ain’t all about those good vibes.

Istvan
Istvan
July 21, 2019 11:56 am

Eva no doubt did a really excellent job recounting Júlia Király’s book. But as others have pointed out the idea that the crisis of 2008 was solved relatively early on for Hungary is problematic. This concern with her conclusion is really based on Eva’s summary statement that “between September 15, 2008, when Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy, and the end of the year when the National Bank could breathe a sigh of relief. The country had survived the crisis.” I am sure that was an accurate summation of Király’s thinking in her book by Eva. Akos Valentinyi who is  Professor of Macroeconomics at the University of Manchester, a research fellow at the Centre for Economic Policy Research, and a senior research fellow at the Institute of Economics Centre for Economic and Regional Studies of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in 2012 wrote a short essay on the impact of 2008 on Hungary and its perspective is radically different than that of Júlia Király’s book as summarized by Eva. That short essay can be read here https://voxeu.org/article/hungarian-crisis , it is a shorter version of a longer study published in CESifo, Munich 2012. I would recommend Eva’s readers look at that essay for a… Read more »

Istvan
Istvan
July 21, 2019 12:44 pm
Reply to  Istvan

While looking at these issues relating to Hungary and the 2008 fiscal crisis I came across repeatedly videos by a supposed Hungarian investment expert Bence Balázs who is all over youtube with get rich investments for Hungarians. He is what we call in the USA a “pitchman,” of course one the the USA’s leading pitchmen was Trump in the real-estate sector.

I have no doubt Bence Balázs paid google well for getting his advertisements into their algorithm relating to Hungarian investments. I tired to find a Hungarian word or phrase similar to pitchman, none seemed appropriate is there one that is regularly used?

Parhuzamos Kapcsolas
Parhuzamos Kapcsolas
July 21, 2019 4:16 pm
Reply to  Istvan

Istvan,

It’s endearing that you think Hungary has capitalism and therefore a current glossary. There’s an adjacent term, and I use adjacent because unlike a pitchman (though it really should be pitchperson by now), an ötletgazda never gets rich.

If Hungary had a free market, the state could not have control over it, which they exert by “influencing” people to choose the Hungarian-speaking manager as someone who’s in on the game, one in the know who to “further financially”, how to win tenders the correct way, you know, Eastern economics.

István
István
July 22, 2019 4:22 am
Reply to  Eva S. Balogh

Yes indeed! The central and national banks are not responsible to resituate any financial loss at the stock exchanges after a bubble burst. Their tasks and by this their point of view is very different of course. Otherwise: will the Fed or the MNB pay me for the loss that Trump causes with his trade wars?

Istvan
Istvan
July 22, 2019 7:08 am
Reply to  István

Well the Federal Reserve and its intervention in 2008, saved billions for certain US investors, not that even those investors did not lose money. There have been many books written on the interventions and bail outs here in the USA. One of the most interesting books is “The Federal Reserve and the Financial Crisis” by Ben Bernanke, former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is a rendition of a series of lectures about the Federal Reserve and the 2008 financial crisis, as part of a course at George Washington University on the role of the Federal Reserve in the economy. Because of the dimensions of the losses some US investors simply had to be saved or the USA was faced with another 1929 level Great Depression. The situation in Hungary was totally different, it was reacting to a debt crisis generated in the USA that went global. Effectively it was a peripheral player in the crisis at the time given how small the Hungarian economy was and is still today. I have today a good retirement in big part to the intervention of the US Federal Reserve in the 2008 crisis. Many of us who were rational relatively lower… Read more »

István
István
July 22, 2019 7:32 am
Reply to  Istvan

The central banks have to react permanently on every economic development, not only during a crisis. It is their job to level between the periods of economic cycles. Especially during a crises of course. But their job to prevent further worsening is done at the moment as markets are functioning again, as they should. It is not relevant who is losing how much money, it just important that the economy does not collapse by a crisis. Does a longer recession follow? Fine, they will use their every day instruments of monetary policy. Overheating again? Same means, but used in the other direction. They care that markets are and remain up, if they help with their work that people don’t lose (more) money as a side effect: fine. But keeping up the value of an investment is absolutely not their task, so you can’t say that the work of a central bank during a crises is done only after the value of some shares are again at the level they had before. If you argue like that for shareholders of Lehman the crises will never be over….

July 22, 2019 7:40 am
Reply to  Istvan

Istvan, you are absolutely right re “Hungary being a peripheral player” in 2008, even Germany – of course not the banks involved which were really hurt.
I have to admit that at the time I saw all this as something which only concerned the speculators who “had bet on the wrong horses” – but that was probably because I was totally occupied with my Hungarian girlfriend, taking her around to see the world including the USA. 🙂
And my income wasn’t so high but not dependent on some crazy capitalist activities.
In Hungary we didn’t feel the crisis, ok, people were complaining – but they do this all the time …
A bit OT:
The good side of this for us was that the $ got so weak – on our several holidays in the USA (one each year from 2008 o 2011) we got almost 1.50$ per €. So not only were hotels and rental cars really cheap, we also did shopping for clothes like crazy – of course by this we helped the US economy to recover.