Subscribe to our social channels to get the latest news about Hungary!
ZH
DE
Budapest–Belgrade railway: quality complaints over track-bed stone supplied by PM Orbán’s father’s company
New details have emerged about the construction of the Budapest–Belgrade railway, and they do not paint a reassuring picture. According to internal correspondence, several parties raised serious quality concerns – yet no visible intervention followed.
Two major players raised concerns
Two main contractors involved in the Budapest–Belgrade railway project – the Chinese-owned China Tiejiuju Engineering & Construction Ltd. and V-Híd, a company linked to Lőrinc Mészáros – raised objections as early as February 2023.
At the centre of the complaints was the so-called SZK1 construction material, one of the most important components of the railway track bed. This category refers to the highest-quality crushed stone, with its exact grain size distribution defined by strict regulations, such as MÁV’s D.11 standard. In the case of the Budapest–Belgrade railway, this is particularly critical for ensuring track stability.
Samples and reports confirmed the issues
The contractors did not merely raise concerns verbally: concrete samples were taken and formal reports were produced. These indicated that the delivered material did not meet the required grain size specifications.
The documentation and laboratory results were sent to the supplier, Dolomit Ltd., a company linked to Győző Orbán, with a request to improve the composition of the material. This raises further questions about oversight on the Budapest–Belgrade railway project.
Weather blamed, but no real improvement
The supplier acknowledged a decline in quality, attributing it to heavy rainfall earlier in the year, which caused mud and clay to mix with the extracted stone.
Although they committed to improvements, no significant progress had been made by March. The Chinese contractor therefore took additional samples – this time from the already installed SZK1 layer. This is a particularly sensitive issue in the Budapest–Belgrade railway project, as the material had by then already been built into the track, as reported by 444.
As we wrote yesterday, Serbia-Hungary railway collapses in a day
Two laboratories, conflicting results
Two laboratories conducted tests: the independent TLI Plc. and EULAB Ltd., commissioned by the Chinese side. However, the findings were not consistent.
According to TLI Plc., the installed material did not meet the required grain size distribution, whereas EULAB Ltd. concluded that it “just about” met the standards. This contradiction further increases uncertainty surrounding the Budapest–Belgrade railway.
MÁV insists everything was compliant
The official position sharply contrasts with the leaked information. According to MÁV, only certified materials meeting all technical and regulatory requirements were used throughout the construction of the Budapest–Belgrade railway.
The railway company also stressed that inspections had not identified any circumstances indicating non-compliance or the use of substandard materials – even after reviewing excerpts from the laboratory reports, as reported by 24.hu.
If you missed it - Orbán-Putin phone call transcript leaked: Hungary-mouse will help Russian-lion “in any matter”
Google is now paying $300 to $500 per hour for doing work online work from home. Last paycheck of me said that $20537 from this easy and simple job. Its amazing and earns are awesome. No boss, full time freedom and earnings are in front of you. This job is just awesome. Every person can makes income online with google easily….
.
More Details For Us→→→→ http://Www.Payathome9.Com
What the report suggests
The issue is not just a technical one about crushed stone quality. It points to three bigger concerns around the Budapest–Belgrade railway project:
Quality control and engineering risk
SZK1 is not a minor input. It is a core railway track-bed material, and if its grain size or composition does not meet standard, that can affect:
track stability
drainage
long-term maintenance costs
operating safety and speed reliability
If objections were raised as early as February 2023, that suggests the problem may have been known internally long before it became public.
Oversight and accountability
The fact that both major contractors reportedly objected is significant. When the main builders themselves raise concerns about a key material supplier, it raises questions such as:
Who approved the material for use?
Were independent lab tests conducted?
Were deliveries rejected, replaced, or still accepted?
Did supervisors document non-compliance and impose consequences?
In a large public infrastructure project, there should be multiple layers of verification, especially for critical materials.
Conflict-of-interest concerns
Because Dolomit Ltd. is reportedly linked to Győző Orbán, the father of Prime Minister Viktor Orbán, the story naturally goes beyond construction quality and into the realm of political economy and favoritism.
Even if the weather explanation is technically plausible, the real issue is whether:
the supplier was treated like any other supplier would be,
quality standards were enforced impartially,
political connections weakened oversight.
On Dolomit Ltd.’s explanation
Blaming heavy rainfall is not inherently impossible. In quarrying and aggregate production, weather can affect extraction conditions and contamination with mud or clay. But that explanation also raises another question:
If the supplier knew quality had deteriorated, why was the material still supplied or not fully screened out?
Bad weather may explain the cause of lower quality, but it does not explain away responsibility. A supplier of railway-grade aggregate is expected to maintain compliance despite difficult conditions or suspend unsuitable deliveries.
Why this matters politically
The Budapest–Belgrade railway has already been controversial because of:
its high cost,
questions about economic return,
limited transparency,
strong ties to politically connected business circles and Chinese financing/construction interests.
So this material-quality dispute reinforces a broader public perception: that the project may be suffering from the classic combination of strategic opacity, politically connected contracting, and weak scrutiny.
Bottom line
This looks like more than a simple “weather caused quality fluctuation” story. It potentially indicates:
poor material control
weak or compromised supervision
possible preferential treatment for a politically connected supplier
If the allegations are accurate, the key issue is not merely that substandard stone existed, but whether the project’s governance system was willing and able to stop it.