“And everyone, like rats, is fleeing the ship”: Captain of the vessel Evika Siliņa complained about the political team of the LR 0 12

Quotes without comments

Especially spicy are the remarks of the head of government against the backdrop of what is happening, for example, with the Rail Baltica project and airBaltic.

"Ha! This is funny! We have pulled out everything that hasn’t been done there for 10 years. For 10 years, in my opinion, this project has not been managed properly at all. And now we have simply brought to light how much this project costs, how it is managed, what is actually happening there. And now everyone is fleeing from that ship like rats," said Evika Siliņa in response to the opposition's accusations that the government is managing the Rail Baltica project very poorly.

Well, firstly, Ms. Siliņa did not come to politics and executive power yesterday – she was, by the way, a minister in Karins' government, and at one time held the position of parliamentary secretary of the Ministry of Internal Affairs. And her party has been in power all these 10 years and much longer! Therefore, the statement that the prime minister has suddenly realized something and pulled it out does not stand up to criticism.

Who will be responsible for all this?!

Secondly, the mention of rats is already on the verge of complete failure, as rats usually flee from a sinking ship. It turns out that the Rail Baltica project is going down (who would doubt it!)... Then the question arises: why is the government investing taxpayers' money in this sinking ship?! And who will be responsible for this?

Not only is the funding deficit for the project of the century reaching 2–4 billion euros (an unmanageable amount for the budget), but the project is also constantly accompanied by various scandals. For instance, in the procurement competition for the supply of railway switches and expansion joints, a firm won whose proposal was 270 million euros more expensive than that of the second contender! The second contender was "dismissed" on a formal basis – the insurance guarantee was slightly shorter than the delivery completion date. And it turned out to be shorter because the very process of the competition dragged on...

The proximity of elections forced the prime minister to initiate a service investigation into this procurement. "At the same time," Evika Siliņa also started an investigation regarding the long-standing decision to begin constructing bridge supports on the Daugava and a railway overpass near Riga Airport, without ensuring that there were funds and that the plan to connect Rail Baltica with Riga and the airport was approved. As we already know, due to a lack of funds, they decided to (for now) abandon this connection, and now this unfinished construction will simply stand and rot...

It is interesting to see if anyone will be held accountable for all this, and if so, will it be... a "scapegoat"?

However, whatever investigations Siliņa may initiate, the main question remains open – what will ultimately happen to the project of the century? Will it be built, and if so, with what funds and when? And how much will taxpayers need to spend annually on subsidies for Rail Baltica, since it is clear that for many years this railway will not be profitable!

However, Siliņa understands perfectly well that all these problems will be the headache of the next governments – surely without her participation!

Flight into the unknown

But with airBaltic, it will be much more difficult to "buy time" and shift responsibility onto the next governments... As is known, the national airline continues to incur losses. And although the size of the losses last year – compared to 2024 – decreased, economists believe that operational losses remained at the same level and the amount of losses is a game on currency fluctuations!

"The losses for the year are 43.2 million euros, compared to 118.8 million euros the year before. But there is no reason to rejoice that the losses have significantly decreased, as the difference is practically only due to currency fluctuations. Operational losses are about the same. AirBaltic continues to burn euros at an alarming rate, and real problems arise in cash flow. Compared to the beginning of the year, cash balances in accounts decreased by 21.8 million euros. Even though loans of 67.3 million euros were received (additional bonds and, as far as I understand, part of it also as a bank loan) and 28 million euros were invested in capital by Lufthansa and the Latvian state. This money has already been spent. And what next?" – questions economist Aivars Strakshas.

And what next – no one knows. It is only known that the airline's management has "paused" the plan for airBaltic to go public. There are apparently two reasons – the stock price, considering the financial situation in airBaltic and geopolitics, will be negligible, and the global situation is such that attracting serious investors through stock sales on the exchange will be almost an impossible mission.

Meanwhile, the company's management has not ruled out that at some point it may have to turn to the government for financial assistance!

The company may need 100–150 million euros to stabilize the situation. It should be noted that the EU does not allow the government to "simply" subsidize businesses. However, a legitimate way can always be devised to... spend taxpayers' money. For example, to formalize the state's injection as a loan or to "force" some state enterprise to become a temporary shareholder of airBaltic. However, even these solutions will only help the company for a short time – if they help at all, considering the troubles with rising fuel prices and the need to pay exorbitant interest on loans (bonds).

What to take to the elections?

In general, there are no good (from the point of view of political consequences) solutions for the prime minister and especially for the Minister of Transport Átis Švinka. The only thing left is to again use the old rhetoric that everything is the fault of the geopolitical situation and those who "attack" the government with criticism are either victims or supporters of Russian-Belarusian propaganda. Will voters believe in these tales?