From the 2026 budget audit
501.9 millió Ft to run grants with no named recipients and no defined output.
Operating costs for a residual grant programme — no specified deliverable, no protected counterparty, no output the cost is priced against.
Roughly 126 Ft per taxpayer per year — 501.9 millió Ft in administration for a programme that cannot say what it administers.
What you see — and what you don't
The seen: the activity of running a grant allocation process. The unseen: the taxpayer whose contribution funds an administrative apparatus with no stated product and no named beneficiary who could be examined.
Objection
"Some programmes are genuinely experimental — you can't name outcomes before you know what works."
Answer
Experimental programmes have hypotheses, defined criteria, and exit conditions. A line named 'further energy and emission-reduction programmes' with no stated counterparty is not experimental — it is open-ended. Cut the operating costs; if a specific programme worth running can be named and scoped, it can be re-presented as such.
Share if you think public grant programmes should name what they fund before spending the money.
The analyst's verdict
Energy and climate policy modernisation system — Further energy and emission-reduction programmes — operating
Rationale
Another discretionary grant line with no named deliverable and no protected counterparty. Immediate Cut.
Transition mechanism
Eliminate in the 2026 cycle.
Affected groups
Recipients of discretionary energy and emission-reduction grants; no protected counterparty is identified.
Free Society Institute
Support independent analysis
Our research is free, open, and unsponsored. If you find it valuable, help us keep it that way.