Absurd these populist stunts every year before the budget generously announce that we will freeze something for ourselves. The law on remuneration of officials and employees of state and municipal institutions, coefficients and calculation of base monthly salary must be changed https://t.co/LLPm46icUX
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ministru prezidents
Tweet
🇱🇻 Latvia is currently paying for security from which all of Europe benefits. However, the bill remains largely with us. From 2027, Latvia will spend at least 5% of GDP on defense. We are strengthening the EU and NATO external border with the aggressor state. This border is not only Latvia's border—it is Europe's security border. But the current system is unfair. ➖️ Latvia borrows money to build fortifications and strengthen the eastern border. ➖️ Due to border-area risk, we pay higher interest on this debt. ➖️ Due to geopolitical risk, Latvia also loses investments and tourists. ➖️ At the same time, we buy billions worth of armaments and military equipment mainly from 🇩🇪 Germany, 🇫🇷 France, 🇸🇪 Sweden, 🇳🇱 the Netherlands, 🇪🇸 Spain and other countries. So Latvia takes on the debt and risk, while our defense spending simultaneously warms Western European economies. And all this is done to protect not only Riga or Daugavpils. Deterrence at Latvia's border also makes Berlin, Munich, Paris and Amsterdam safer. Therefore, the 7 billion euros Latvia is asking for is not “extra money for Latvia.” It is part of the cost of protecting Europe's common border. In seven years, that would be only about 0.4% of the nearly 2 trillion euro EU budget. For 449 million Europeans—about 2.23 euros per person per year. One coffee. For Latvia's inhabitants—about 540 euros per year. This difference very clearly shows the problem. Latvia will defend its border in any case. The question is—will all of Europe pay for Europe's common security, or will we leave a disproportionately large share of the bill to countries that happen geographically to be next to the aggressor's border? We are not asking for solidarity just for the sake of solidarity. We are offering the most effective European security investment—investing money where the real threat is. 🇪🇺 Europe's eastern border is common. The bill for its defense must also be common. https://t.co/oyE1yMcnR2
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ministru prezidents
Quote
This mechanical increase of government and Saeima deputies' salaries must be frozen; there can be no talk of a rise when the budget lacks funds. There is no room for discussion there https://t.co/RgJoyIp11T
Prime Minister Andris Kulbergs (AS) conceptually believes that government salaries should be frozen next year, the prime minister's communications adviser Elīna Šverna told the LETA agency. https://t.co/GfUOJv5XyZ
“In 2024, Evika Siliņa called this a ‘very successful deal’. It seems to me that after two years we finally have the opportunity to assess how successful it was.” “340 million euros at 14.5 percent. Then another 40 million. Total 380 million. At the time, even financial market experts publicly said — this was the most expensive bond rate in Europe that year‼️But the government told us about a success.” “If the market asks a company for 14.5 percent, that is not a compliment to the company. It is a very loud warning signal.” “And that is precisely where my main complaint against the previous government lies. If you borrow money at 14.5 percent, a fundamental corporate transformation plan must be on the table that same day — what the fleet will be, how costs will be reduced, how the capital structure will be arranged, and when a strategic investor will come in.” “Instead, we continued the growth story. Now, two years later, we have Seabury, creditor negotiations, preparation of a new plan, and discussion about who will give the next money.” “That is why I sometimes look with a certain envy at the previous government’s optimism. Borrowing at 14.5 percent and calling it a very successful deal — you really need to know how to be that optimistic.” “Our government will not repeat this mistake. First restructuring. First creditor participation. First a viable airBaltic. And only then a conversation about whether the state still has to finance anything more.”
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ekonomists (FM ministra birojs)
Quote
Andris is still laughing. And it's unclear whether it's through tears. I haven't for a long time.
The previous government spoke beautifully and many people believed. Meanwhile, as a society, we systematically and inevitably continued to lose hundreds of millions. Not only with Ošlejs' ballads, but with the hands of completely real and decisive people. They are not a rarity, the typical level of a Twitter commenter. Ordinary people.
My heart truly hurts. Physically. When I first became acquainted with the company's situation from the inside and came out of the Saeima meeting, psychosomatics kicked in. It stabbed my heart. No, no heart attack.
You may not believe it, but since then I no longer smile at meetings. I watch with incomprehension the bustling carefree faces that are typical of all corporate governance meetings.
For example. This week I participated in a meeting about RailBaltic. There, the Saeima representative emotionlessly announced that the construction technical specification specifies gravel that is not available in Latvia at all. Only on Mars. And nobody found that strange, the meeting continued.
I decided that it's a victory. Have a nice evening.
“In 2024, Evika Siliņa called this a ‘very successful deal’. It seems to me that after two years we finally have the opportunity to assess how successful it was.” “340 million euros at 14.5 percent. Then another 40 million. Total 380 million. At the time, even financial market experts publicly said — this was the most expensive bond rate in Europe that year‼️But the government told us about a success.” “If the market asks a company for 14.5 percent, that is not a compliment to the company. It is a very loud warning signal.” “And that is precisely where my main complaint against the previous government lies. If you borrow money at 14.5 percent, a fundamental corporate transformation plan must be on the table that same day — what the fleet will be, how costs will be reduced, how the capital structure will be arranged, and when a strategic investor will come in.” “Instead, we continued the growth story. Now, two years later, we have Seabury, creditor negotiations, preparation of a new plan, and discussion about who will give the next money.” “That is why I sometimes look with a certain envy at the previous government’s optimism. Borrowing at 14.5 percent and calling it a very successful deal — you really need to know how to be that optimistic.” “Our government will not repeat this mistake. First restructuring. First creditor participation. First a viable airBaltic. And only then a conversation about whether the state still has to finance anything more.”
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ministru prezidents
Quote
“In 2024, Evika Siliņa called this a ‘very successful deal’. It seems to me that after two years we finally have the opportunity to assess how successful it was.” “340 million euros at 14.5 percent. Then another 40 million. Total 380 million. At the time, even financial market experts publicly said — this was the most expensive bond rate in Europe that year‼️But the government told us about a success.” “If the market asks a company for 14.5 percent, that is not a compliment to the company. It is a very loud warning signal.” “And that is precisely where my main complaint against the previous government lies. If you borrow money at 14.5 percent, a fundamental corporate transformation plan must be on the table that same day — what the fleet will be, how costs will be reduced, how the capital structure will be arranged, and when a strategic investor will come in.” “Instead, we continued the growth story. Now, two years later, we have Seabury, creditor negotiations, preparation of a new plan, and discussion about who will give the next money.” “That is why I sometimes look with a certain envy at the previous government’s optimism. Borrowing at 14.5 percent and calling it a very successful deal — you really need to know how to be that optimistic.” “Our government will not repeat this mistake. First restructuring. First creditor participation. First a viable airBaltic. And only then a conversation about whether the state still has to finance anything more.”
Today in the Saeima we are considering the question of possible state involvement in stabilising airBaltic's finances. airBaltic is needed for Latvia. It is our connectivity with the world, jobs, tourism, exports and the opportunity for Latvian entrepreneurs to be in international markets. At the same time, the state cannot be the sole financier. The new plan also envisages private investor participation, a more efficient fleet, debt reduction and Riga as airBaltic's main hub. During the previous government's term, we changed the company's management and tasked it with developing a new, sustainable business plan. Today we continue this work. It is important for us to preserve an airline of strategic importance to Latvia, while protecting taxpayers' interests. 🇱🇻✈️
@JanisIkstens Show at least one prime minister's burned taxpayer euro related to the airline. If you don't know how to calculate, then you'd better keep your mouth shut.
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ekonomists (FM ministra birojs)
Reply
@JanisIkstens Show at least one prime minister's burned taxpayer euro related to the airline. If you don't know how to calculate, then you'd better keep your mouth shut.
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ministru prezidents
Reply
@Aigars1972 very precisely described - that is exactly what is being implemented right now. This has nothing to do with pre-elections. AB must be critically sorted out before them. Otherwise it would be yet another €100 million loan from the state with no real chance of recovery. Currently the state gives nothing
Reflections on @AndrisKulbergs moves regarding airBaltic. So, what's happening: 1. Thanks to V. Dombrovskis's appointed Gaus and the JV/PRO-communists, AB's value is minus 400 million and debts 1.8 billion, so >400% bankruptcy! 2. Bankruptcy means minus 2% of GDP and numerous millions in unemployment benefits. A major recession in the economy, etc. 3. If creditors can be scared with the loss of all money, offering as an alternative additional lending + AB shares, then it might work. 4. If the State as a creditor offers 30 million from its side, setting an example to others, it could even work and the other creditors lend proportionally more, which could also pull the project through. 5. In other words, if it's not a cheap pre-election show to avoid bankruptcy until the elections, then cautious support from me, because all other alternatives are even worse. 6. In the medium term, the state should sell all its remaining shares, recovering at least a little of what was lent. The state really has no business in aviation, as it always ends up with just flying ministries, nothing more!
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Tieslietu ministrs
Tweet
💶 EUR 26.8 million – money that could potentially go toward the public good. Latvian banks currently hold more than 39,000 long-unused accounts containing a total of approximately EUR 26.8 million. The Saeima has supported in the second reading a clear procedure for how to handle these funds. A client will have 5 years to apply and receive their money. If it is not claimed, the funds will come under state control. This procedure will not apply to Latvian residents, nor to frozen funds, funds seized in criminal proceedings, or funds subject to collection. When this money comes under state control, it must be used meaningfully and in the interests of the whole public! Children are our present and also our future. That is why I propose directing it to the creation of a Safe House for Children and Youth. ℹ️ The bill still needs the Saeima's final approval.
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ekonomists (FM ministra birojs)
Reply
That about the food is also in other countries. For example, in the UK, hot chicken is sold with VAT (because it is food as in a restaurant), but cold chicken is not subject to VAT (because it is food). And there are even lawsuits about this, a million-dollar industry for lawyers. And that is not nonsense, but a consequence of introducing different regulations for different groups, resulting in all sorts of oddities. About those cash registers, for instance. Well, they are needed everywhere, but there are exemptions for artisans. But a step left or right, and you still need a cash register. And it looks absurd.
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Politiķis un žurnālists
Tweet
Having looked into the bus station sale story, I can't shake the feeling of déjà vu that something similar has been seen before. I wouldn't be surprised if people linked to Šķēle emerge there in the future, because that café owner really doesn't look like a serious developer…
❓ What is actually being decided today about “airBaltic”? Most important - Saeima today is not deciding on granting new money to “airBaltic”. Today's decision is about whether the state will retain the opportunity to participate in negotiations with “airBaltic” creditors and defend Latvia's interests in the company's restructuring process. The situation is not simple. “airBaltic” has accumulated large debts, and the previously raised expensive bonds have placed a heavy financial burden on the company. Continuing to simply invest taxpayer money is not a solution. But allowing the company to cease operations would also be irresponsible. “airBaltic” connects Latvia with the world, provides jobs, and is an essential part of our economy. Therefore, an opportunity is currently being given to try to sort out the company. For the first time, there is a concrete plan - reduce the debt burden, sort out the company's operations and finances, and then attract a strategic investor. The state cannot and must not in the long term alone maintain the airline. ❗ So what does Saeima decide today? - defer the state's due 18 million euro loan payment; - give the opportunity to restructure existing state claims; - allow the state to participate in bondholder negotiations and be at the table where the future of “airBaltic” is decided. This is not a decision to grant “airBaltic” another 30 million euros. If a specific state financial investment is needed in the future, it will have to be decided separately. The choice now is harsh - do nothing and risk the end of “airBaltic” operations, or use the last opportunity to sort out the company while defending taxpayer interests. The goal is clear - an “airBaltic” that can fly and earn without regular state money injections, and a strategic investor that, together with the state, takes responsibility for the company's future. Latvia needs good connectivity with the world. But Latvian residents should not have to endlessly pay for the airline's losses. #APVIENOTAISSARAKSTS#airBaltic#Saeima#Valdība#AndrisKulbergs
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Politiķis un žurnālists
Quote
The first prime minister in the last fifteen years who has delved into and understood the airBaltic problem at a specific time and place. As for what previous prime ministers and transport ministers were thinking when they casually handed out millions, I'd rather not comment… https://t.co/3WrqNm1qtQ
❓ What is actually being decided today about “airBaltic”? Most importantly, the Saeima is not deciding today on granting new money to “airBaltic”. Today's decision is whether the state will retain the ability to participate in negotiations with “airBaltic” creditors and defend Latvia's interests in the company's restructuring process. The situation is not simple. “airBaltic” has accumulated large debts, and the previously attracted expensive bonds have placed a heavy financial burden on the company. Continuing to simply invest taxpayers' money is not a solution. However, allowing the company to cease operations would also be irresponsible. “airBaltic” connects Latvia with the world, provides jobs, and is an essential part of our economy. Therefore, an opportunity is currently being given to try to sort out the company. For the first time, there is a concrete plan - to reduce the debt burden, sort out the company's operations and finances, and then attract a strategic investor. The state cannot and must not maintain the airline alone in the long term. ❗ What is the Saeima deciding today? - postpone the state's due loan payment of 18 million euros; - allow restructuring of existing state claims; - allow the state to participate in bondholder negotiations and be at the table where the future of “airBaltic” is decided. This is not a decision to grant “airBaltic” another 30 million euros. If a specific state financial contribution is needed in the future, that will have to be decided separately. The choice now is harsh - do nothing and risk the end of “airBaltic” operations, or use the last opportunity to sort out the company while defending taxpayers' interests. The goal is clear - an “airBaltic” that can fly and earn without regular state cash injections, and a strategic investor that, together with the state, takes responsibility for the company's future. Latvia needs good connectivity with the world. But Latvian residents should not have to endlessly pay for the airline's losses. #APVIENOTAISSARAKSTS#airBaltic#Saeima#Valdība#AndrisKulbergs
APVIENOTAIS SARAKSTS - Latvijas Zaļā partija, Latvijas Reģionu Apvienība, Liepājas partija · Ekonomists (FM ministra birojs)
Quote
It's been a while since I've talked about economics, there's no time for it, so Sunday lessons are currently skipped.
But here a person has written a good summary, you can read, remember, reflect.
I'll highlight one quote: "Every price control, every subsidy, every centrally administered minimum wage policy ignores the basic principles of economics and results in wreckage."
This is something almost no one in Latvia understands. A large part of the budget troubles, the overwhelming part, lies in this misunderstanding.
Here are the most important lessons from the Austrian School of Economics in one post:
The entire edifice of modern economic policy rests on a lie: that a group of planners can manage an economy better than the people living in it.
Start with value. Nothing has value in the abstract. You value a glass of water differently when you're drowning than when you're dying of thirst in the Sahara. Value lives inside individual human minds, not in objects, not in labor hours, not in government decree. Every price control, every subsidy, every centrally administered wage floor ignores this and produces predictable wreckage.
Money didn't come from a government committee. It emerged spontaneously from markets, as traders across centuries converged on commodities like gold and silver because they held value across time and space. Governments didn't invent money; they hijacked it.
Inflation is the expansion of the money supply itself. Rising prices are the symptom. When the Federal Reserve expanded its balance sheet from roughly $4 trillion to nearly $9 trillion between 2020 and 2022, the price explosion that followed wasn't a mystery. It was the direct, mechanical consequence of that expansion. The Fed caused it.
Prices do something irreplaceable: they transmit information across millions of actors simultaneously. When lumber prices spiked in 2021, builders across North America cut waste and sought alternatives without a single bureaucrat issuing a memo. No central planner can replicate that signal, because no central planner possesses the knowledge embedded in it.
This connects directly to the knowledge problem. You know your neighborhood, your suppliers, your customers, your own tolerance for risk. Your competitor knows his. A bureaucrat in Washington knows none of it. The knowledge required to run an economy is dispersed, personal, and contextual. It cannot be extracted, aggregated, and fed into a planning model. The Soviet Union ran that experiment for seventy years and produced chronic shortages of basic goods.
Bad businesses must be allowed to fail. When they fail, they release labor, capital, and resources to producers who will use them more effectively. When Washington handed General Motors $49.5 billion in 2009 to prevent exactly that process, it kept misallocated capital locked inside a failing structure and punished every competitor who had managed their business responsibly.
Every function government performs, a voluntary market arrangement performs better: faster, cheaper, and responsive to actual human preferences rather than political incentives. Education, roads, security, dispute resolution, all of it. Government agencies face no profit and loss signal, no competition, and no mechanism to reward performance. They optimize for budget preservation and political survival, and the people using the service have no exit option.
The political class and the central banking apparatus that sustains it are the villains. Both benefit directly from the idea that expert management beats voluntary exchange. They will not surrender that idea willingly.
What would you add?