Investments: Posts and News mentioning Apvienotais saraksts
Political posts and news in Investments that mention Apvienotais saraksts, from monitored Latvian public sources.
203
Kārlis Seržants (@karlis_serzants)
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
The government chose to kneel before creditors. By December there is no investor, no refinancing and no possibility to turn airBaltic around in winter. In December there will be only: inject another 100+225 million or write off everything. This is a joke at the taxpayers' expense. @AndrisKulbergs@KNL_LTV1@SlesersAinars@LapinsGirts@Chapis@atis_svinka
Kristaps Krištopans (LPV) reminds that regarding 'airBaltic', not everything that is promised always comes true. Therefore his represented party will vote against the new draft law that would give the government a mandate to participate in stabilizing the company's financial situation.
Viktors Valainis (ZZS) believes that the unused opportunity is increasing Lufthansa's stake in the company, arguing that Lufthansa should invest more in Latvia's airline than the state. Neither the prime minister, nor the company's management, nor Transport Minister Kozlovskis agree with this.
Private bondholders are ready to invest in airBaltic; the government needs a Saeima mandate to decide whether we want it or not, said government leader Andris Kulbergs (AS).
Private bondholders are ready to invest in airBaltic; the government needs a Saeima mandate to decide whether we want it or not, said government leader Andris Kulbergs (AS).
@guntarsv It may be that it is important. But as long as the ticket reservation platform does not belong to AirBaltic, but partially belongs to Gausa's company (and most likely he is also able to control/disable it if he wants), any money should not be pushed into that so-called 'national airline'.
#defacto returns to @LatvijasTV air – on Sundays, right after Panorāma. This week on the show: Business trip or campaign trip? KNAB checks the visit of a minister from the prime minister's party to Kurzeme. How far is Kulbergs' government ready to go to save the airline 'airBaltic'? https://t.co/2oW9Dv4qEY
#defacto returns to @LatvijasTV air – on Sundays, right after Panorāma. This week on the show: Business trip or campaign trip? KNAB checks the visit of a minister from the prime minister's party to Kurzeme. How far is Kulbergs' government ready to go to save the airline 'airBaltic'? https://t.co/2oW9Dv4qEY
🤝 Today a working meeting with @AndrisKulbergs to discuss cooperation issues and how we can help advance significant state development issues. The Prime Minister cares deeply about the country's economic development – and here our goals coincide. 2 important points:🧵 https://t.co/YQp2L0wDtH
Nothing new.
Yesterday, in a closed meeting, the government reviewed the Rail Baltica project, but afterwards the public heard neither new decisions nor a clear plan for further action.
Once again, what we already knew was reiterated: the project costs must be significantly reduced and Latvia must set clear public funding ceilings. The first phase of the project in Latvia is currently estimated at around six billion euros, but there is still no clarity on funding, timelines, and specific next steps.
New possibilities mentioned included revising the planned train speed and using existing railway corridors. At the same time, it is claimed that the location of the main track will not be changed. The government should explain how these plans can be combined and what real savings they would bring.
Other savings solutions, such as lower embankments, less noise barriers, and other technical simplifications, were evaluated and decided during the previous government.
Nothing new was said about the Riga connection either. Started works continue so that by 2029 existing Vivi trains could run from Riga Airport station to Riga Central Station, Salaspils, and further on other routes.
We all agree with the goal of building a connection with Europe that Latvia can afford and that people can use. However, the current government is so far repeating what is already known, even though it now has a comprehensive project evaluation that the previous government did not yet have.
We expect from the government not another evaluation, but concrete decisions on what we will build, how much it will cost, how we will change contracts, from what sources we will finance it, and within what deadlines we will accomplish it.
Adding to what has been said earlier about today's expected closed thematic committee meeting of the government, where the Rail Baltica project will be discussed.
Many have gained the impression that @AndrisKulbergs and the government talk a lot, but the necessary decisions are not being made. One would nevertheless hope that today's discussions will be followed by concrete decisions:
1. On the next steps for the A&M assessment. It is essential to understand whether all three proposed scenarios have clearly identified legal risks and full cost calculations have been made.
2. When considering @AndrisKulbergs' proposal to change the route alignment and direct it through Riga, the public must be shown the calculated significant cost increase, as well as the risks of losing future European Union funding.
The current government considers that the Cabinet of Ministers' decision of December 2024 on the progress of the Rail Baltica main line construction is not binding on it. It is also unclear on what legal basis @AndrisKulbergs could deviate from the European Commission's Implementing Decision, which clearly defines the purpose and procedure for the use of EU funding.
3. It is positive that the meeting will also assess the progress of the main line's section D construction and the savings achieved so far.
Today, the government needs not only reports and discussions but also clear, legally substantiated, and financially responsible decisions.
Received an order to attack those who mistreat immigrants, received an order to attack NA and AS. Spriņģes and Re:Baltica have never investigated Vienotība and the Progressives, all their misdeeds with airBaltic, railBaltic, Briškens's piles in the Daugava, Sprūds's interesting activities at the Ministry of Defence, Evika Siliņa's and Kariņš's flights, etc., etc. Is that really investigative journalism? Is that really journalism? Or are engaged “journalists” through interesting funding sources?
Adding to what has been said earlier about today's expected closed thematic committee meeting of the government, where the Rail Baltica project will be discussed.
Many have gained the impression that @AndrisKulbergs and the government talk a lot, but the necessary decisions are not being made. One would nevertheless hope that today's discussions will be followed by concrete decisions:
1. On the next steps for the A&M assessment. It is essential to understand whether all three proposed scenarios have clearly identified legal risks and full cost calculations have been made.
2. When considering @AndrisKulbergs' proposal to change the route alignment and direct it through Riga, the public must be shown the calculated significant cost increase, as well as the risks of losing future European Union funding.
The current government considers that the Cabinet of Ministers' decision of December 2024 on the progress of the Rail Baltica main line construction is not binding on it. It is also unclear on what legal basis @AndrisKulbergs could deviate from the European Commission's Implementing Decision, which clearly defines the purpose and procedure for the use of EU funding.
3. It is positive that the meeting will also assess the progress of the main line's section D construction and the savings achieved so far.
Today, the government needs not only reports and discussions but also clear, legally substantiated, and financially responsible decisions.
Adding to what has been said earlier about today's expected closed thematic committee meeting of the government, where the Rail Baltica project will be discussed.
Many have gained the impression that @AndrisKulbergs and the government talk a lot, but the necessary decisions are not being made. One would nevertheless hope that today's discussions will be followed by concrete decisions:
1. On the next steps for the A&M assessment. It is essential to understand whether all three proposed scenarios have clearly identified legal risks and full cost calculations have been made.
2. When considering @AndrisKulbergs' proposal to change the route alignment and direct it through Riga, the public must be shown the calculated significant cost increase, as well as the risks of losing future European Union funding.
The current government considers that the Cabinet of Ministers' decision of December 2024 on the progress of the Rail Baltica main line construction is not binding on it. It is also unclear on what legal basis @AndrisKulbergs could deviate from the European Commission's Implementing Decision, which clearly defines the purpose and procedure for the use of EU funding.
3. It is positive that the meeting will also assess the progress of the main line's section D construction and the savings achieved so far.
Today, the government needs not only reports and discussions but also clear, legally substantiated, and financially responsible decisions.
Tomorrow the government will discuss the Rail Baltica project in a closed thematic committee meeting.
There are two pieces of news. The good one: the new government, for the first time since its creation on May 29, is finally starting to look at Rail Baltica issues. The bad one: decisions will not be made, and the public will most likely not learn anything, because the meeting will be held in a closed format.
A lot has been done over the past year, so this government must not limit itself to empty statements that 'work continues' or, on the contrary, that 'everything is bad.'
More than a week ago, an independent assessment was completed, which analyzed three scenarios, the possible scope to be built in the first phase, sources of financing, options to switch or adjust contracts, as well as responsibility for design errors.
Information related to national security can be secret, not project management solutions and responsibility for mistakes made.
I want the work started during my ministerial mandate on reviewing project solutions, reducing costs, and evaluating mistakes made to be continued.