Cseh Valentin szerk.: „70 éve alakult a MAORT” – tanulmányok egy bányavállalat történetéből (2009)

Lajos Srágli: Hungary's Economy, Politics and MAORT

for the majority of goods proposed as offset, while the price of crude oil was specified way below the low domestic prices."'

2 The events that had been ongoing in connection with MAORT since 1945, and the development of the company's situation was closely connected to the economic and political changes that played out in the country. In this double oriented system, the company's situation and the requirements set against it were determined not so much by the economic, as by the political side. By 1949, only the smallest companies remained in private hands within the field of industry and mining, along with foreign owned ones. Companies employing 10 or more employees, and those in foreign ownership were nationalized in December 1949, through Law-decree no. 20 of 1949. Foreign owned companies transferred to state ownership at this time actually ended up in state management sooner, in part because of the economic reasons that were mentioned, and in part in a way whereby lawsuits were brought against their management, who were charged with sabotage and espionage. The major economic trials were concentrated around key economic and power positions: they were conducted against the senior officials of major, foreign owned companies, and together with them those of the ministries. The sabotage trial conducted against i\LAORTs management in the autumn and winter of 1948 was of critical significance in this series of court cases. The concluded and unperformable contracts ultimately turned against not just the state, but MAORT as well: the Soviet companies engaging in export transactions accused MAORT for delivery delays, lodging a complaint against it at the heads of industrial affairs. MAORT's crude oil production never fell below a volume that covered the country's internal demand after the reconstruction of war damages even despite economic hardship. The withdrawal, however, of the unrealistic quantities that were prescribed could not be managed until the autumn of 1947. Production moved in the range of 81-99% of the level that was according to expectations, but then exceeded 100% in October 1947, and remained above the level prescribed by the government all the way to September 1948.

163 On the basis of the realistic evaluation of the facts, neither the decline of produced crude oil quantities, the lack of success in prospecting, nor the cancellation of the Budapest gas pipeline's construction could have served as the basis for accusations subsequently made against MAORT. Forceful state intervention was motivated by political reasons apart from economic factors, just one road remained for the state to take over MAORT: if the fact that MAORT violated the accord and agreement concluded with it (as well as its predecessor), moreover that it defaulted on performing its undertaken obligations could be proven, because in this case the rights it was granted would revert to the state, as in the event of the company going bankrupt. Those who saw nationalization as the sole means to eliminate problems subsequently went on to base their notions on this. It was primarily the Hungarian Communist Party ('MKP') that was calling for MAORT being transferred to state ownership.

164 Up to 1948, it managed to have its intent accepted almost without limitations by the Economic High Council and the political police, although not so much by the Ministry of Industry. OI- XIX-F-l-l 9.d„ XlX-f-l-oo Id. 3., 3.d. 17.; ( )I. XIX-F-l-l 9.d.; OL XlX-L-l-oo Id. 1 Li. OL Z 357 pack. 2. (September 25, 1948) IM The I lungarian Communist Party's district conference at Nagykanizsa articulated demands for M.\( IRT's nationalization as early as March, 1946. Zala, March I", 1946.