V kratkem pismu Nyberg slovenskega predsednika vlade Mira Cerarja spominja, da je bil boj proti korupciji najpomembnejše sporočilo njegove lanske predvolilne kampanje, kar je vredno vsega odobravanja, vendar pa praksa kaže, da se v Sloveniji dogaja nekaj drugega.
Švedski manager, ki ga je prejšnji teden doletela politična čistka zaradi domnevno spornih previsokih plač izvršnih direktorjev slabe banke - njenega glavnega izvršnega direktorja Torbjörna Månssona je vlada prav tako nemudoma odpoklicala, kar bi se morda lahko izkazalo celo kot nezakonito (!) -, opozarja, da imamo v Sloveniji problem predvsem s turistično industrijo (t.i. hospitality sector), ki niti približno ni na evropskem nivoju.
Ob tem Lars Nyerg posebej izpostavlja primer Save Turizem, ki po njegovi oceni v tem pogledu še bolj zaostaja. Kot je znano, je slaba banka poskušala prodati to izjemno zadolženo gorenjsko podjetje, iz katerega se napajajo mnogi paradržavi lobiji, kar je po nekaterih informacijah dejansko botrovalo močni in brutalni medijsko-lobistični akciji konec septembra, zaradi katere je bilo obglavljeno vodstvo DUTB.
Na Portalu PLUS razpolagamo z več imeni, ki naj bi stala v ozadju tega kadrovskega masakra, njihovo edini motiv pa je strah pred izgubo dolgoletnih privilegijev in dostopa do javnih sredstev. Če bodo pravniki soglašali, bomo že kmalu objavili tudi bolj konkretne osebe, "krive" kadrovskih menjav v DUTB.
Lars Nyberg je premierja v javnem pismu, ki so ga prejeli tudi nekateri visoki uradniki Evropske komisije - in zaradi tega se uresničuje napoved našega urednika Dejana Steinbucha, ki jo je dal na Odmevih na Televiziji Slovenija minuli teden, češ da bo imel zaradi dogodkov na slabi banki največje probleme ravno Miro Cerar, ko bo moral v Bruslju pojasnevati, kakšen lov na čarovnice se gremo v Sloveniji -, sprašuje, kako je možno, da si je lastnik Sava Turizem, tj. holdinška delniška družba Sava pri bankah izposojala toliko denarja, vendar ga nikoli ni dovolj investirala v svoje hotele, da bi bili konkurenčni.
Še več, Nyberg se sprašuje, kako je mogoče, da je holding prezadolžen, hoteli pa so bili deležni premajhnih vlaganj. Kam je šel denar? Poleg tega, dodaja Nyberg, so krediti, ki jih ima Sava, d.d., večji kot bi jih ta družba lahko kadar koli vrnila bankam. Kdo bo plačal razliko? Slovenski davkoplačevalci.
Po načrtu po prestrukturiranju - Sava ima negativni kapiral, njene delnice so ničvredne - bi ne glede na vse njen sedanji lastniški menedžment obdržal 23% lastniški delež, kar je nepredstavljivo v kateri koli članici Evropske unije, vendar je mogoče v Sloveniji. Lars Nyberg potem logično sklepa, da je odgovor treba iskati v povezavi z Gorenjsko banko, ki je največji lastnik Save, saj jo je tako intenzivno kreditirala, da bi zaradi tega skoraj izgubila licenco Banke Slovenije...
Po mnenju Nyberga je Sava Turizem podjetje v nacionalnem interesu, toda v vladnem seznamu strateških podjetij, ki naj se ne bi prodajale tujcem, je namesto Save Turizem znašla kar celotna delniška družba Sava, ki je blizu bankrota in je doslej zapravila že ogromno davkoplačevalskega denarja...
Odstavljeni predsednik upravnega odbora DUTB zaključuje, da je slaba banka ponudila transparentno pot za prestrukturiranje Save Turizem, podobno kot je to storila za številna druga podjetja v težavah (npr. Cimos). Toda ta načrt ni bil po volji trenutnim lastnikom Save. Lars Nyberg svoje odprto pismo Cerarju zaključuje s sumom korupcije, ki naj bi je bilo v primeru Save Turizem čutiti na vsakem koraku ("in every corner").
Je to tisto, kar ste resnično mislili v svoji kampanji, ko ste govorili o boju proti korupciji. Je to smer, v katero bi radi vodili Slovenijo?, se na koncu pisma retorično sprašuje Nyberg.
V nadaljevanju objavljamo pismo v celoti in v angleškem izvirniku, predsedniku vlade Miru Cerarju pa želimo, da bi ga končno srečala pamet in da bi začel boriti proti paradržavnim mafijskim strukturam, ki nam uničujejo državo!
Open letter to the Prime Minister of Slovenia, Mr Miro Cerar
Dear Mr Cerar
The fight against corruption was the most important message in your election campaign last year. This fight is worth all possible respect. But I have some questions on how it has worked in practise.
Slovenia is a beautiful and interesting country with great natural potential within the hospitality industry. But the hospitality sector is not even close European standards. And the most important group, which should be the shining star of Slovenia, the Sava Turizem, is even further behind. Why is this big asset of yours not better taken care of?
The owner of Sava Turizem, the Sava d.d. - a pure holding company - has borrowed extensively in the banks. Still the hotels in Sava Turizem have not been able to invest to remain competitive. How comes that the holding company is over-indebted but the hotels under-invested? Where has the money gone?
The credits taken by Sava d.d. are bigger than they can ever pay back to the banks. Taxpayers will pay the difference. The company’s equity is negative; the shares are worthless. Still, in the reconstruction plan suggested by the management, the owners would keep 23 per cent of the company. This is a subsidy from the taxpayers to the owners, which would not even be suggested in other countries. Why is this possible in Slovenia? Why should owners (and management) gain at the expense of the taxpayers?
Sava d.d. is the biggest owner in Gorenjska Banka and has according to the regulator (The Bank of Slovenia) a controlling influence of the bank. Gorenjska has given big loans to Sava d.d., which has brought the bank close to losing its license. According to the Bank of Slovenia, €13 millions must be injected as fresh equity before yearend if the bank is to survive. Still the bank has been trusted to manage the restructuring plan for its de facto parent company, the Sava d.d. There is a lot of talk in the Slovenian press about conflicts of interest. But can you find a more prominent example of conflicting interests than the Sava d.d. management restructuring itself via Gorenjska?
The Sava Turizem is clearly of national interest. But in the new government policy naming the relevant companies, it is not the Sava Turizem that has been declared of national interest, but the Sava d.d. How can a close to bankrupt holding company, which has obviously lost a lot of money for the taxpayers and which has under-invested in its tourist assets, be of national interest?
BAMC has offered a transparent way of improving the Sava Turizem assets up to European standards, taking care of the huge Slovenian potential. BAMC has shown the ability to restructure companies in a number of industries with Cimos as the most prominent example. The present Sava d.d. management, on the other hand, has failed to improve its hospitality assets. Still the government is now proposing to take the Sava assets out of BAMC and let the present management continue to work. Is this really in the interest of Slovenia – or just in the interest of the Sava d.d. management?
In the Sava case, given what I have seen and read, I feel a smell of corruption in every corner. Is this really what you meant in your campaign when you talked about fighting corruption? Is this the direction in which you want to lead Slovenia?
With best wishes
Dr Lars Nyberg
Cc: Mr Pocivalsek, Minister of Economy
Mr Mramor, Minister of Finance
Mr Jazbec, Governor, Bank of Slovenia
Mr Sircelj, Committee of Financial and Monetary Policy
Mr Szekely, European Commission
Mr Anderton, ECB
Ms Velculescu, IMF
Mr Peterschmitt, EBRD