Two weeks after the scandal erupted over the President’s helicopter flight to a state celebration in Beltinci, President of the Republic Nataša Pirc Musar also spoke out. In a lengthy post on social media, she attempted to explain the circumstances that led to the decision to use helicopter transport and to address accusations of excessive costs and carbon footprint. However, her post raised new questions, particularly regarding the accuracy of the cost estimates, her understanding of security, and her credibility when making promises.
Here is the President’s statement in its entirety: “There has been much discussion regarding my helicopter transport to the celebration in Beltinci. Therefore, I would like to clarify the actual situation and ask for your understanding. You can read the full statement on my public profile. Protecting the President The President of the country is a protected person by law – this cannot be waived even during their free time. Security guards decide on the safest route, and during the summer traffic jams, the road from Umag to Beltinci was simply unsuitable and unreliable. Why a helicopter I had two options: to stay at home or to travel to Prekmurje for the holiday by helicopter. I chose the second option because I believe it is important for the President to honour the people and the holiday with her presence.
Cost You may have seen the figure of 9,900 euros floating around in the media. This is not the actual cost of my flight. The actual additional cost (fuel + landing fees) was approximately 1,300 euros. Everything else is a fixed cost, regardless of whether the helicopter flies or not.
Ecological aspect I, too, am aware of the impact on the environment. I use the helicopter very rarely –only three times in two and a half years – and I travel by road for the majority of my trips (more than 150,000 km). Sometimes, however, safety rules mean that “green” would not really be green. For example, when I wanted to go to Venice by train, my security guards would still have to drive to Venice and back to wait for me there.
The state must have set security and transportation arrangements for its highest representatives – this is not a privilege, but a necessary part of statehood. Thank you for taking the time to read this and for sharing it.”
The most controversial part of her statement was the cost calculation. The President claimed that the cost of her flight was only around 1,300 euros – the cost of fuel and landing fees. Everything else was said to be fixed costs that arise regardless of whether the helicopter flies or not.
But this raises a key question: Does this mean that fixed costs are included in the calculation for other flights, but not for hers? In any case, taxpayers pay for the entire package – fuel, depreciation, maintenance, pilots’ salaries, and other costs. This means that the flight cannot be free or charged “just for fuel,” as indirectly implied by the President’s explanation.
Boštjan M. Turk also argues that the cost of using the helicopter cannot be only 1,300 euros. “Especially considering that the helicopter also has to return to Ljubljana. Take a taxi from Beltinci to Lucija: it will cost you at least 400 euros. It’s incomparable. An hour of pilot time costs I don’t know how much. And if the government lies, as well as Tina Gaber’s boyfriend (the Prime Minister), why wouldn’t Nataša Pric Musar?”
Peter Jančič also pointed out that commercial prices for an hour of helicopter flight, which are often less well equipped than state helicopters, are around 2,500 euros per hour. Based on the duration of the President’s flight (three hours and 40 minutes), the commercial price would be around 9,000–10,000 euros, which is consistent with the calculations reported by the media. We have checked the accuracy of her statements with the police, and we will publish their response when we receive it.
Security: Law or regulation?
The President also stated in her post that she cannot waive security, as this is required by law. However, former Minister of the Interior Aleš Hojs publicly responded: “It is not the law, Ms. Nataša Pric Musar, it is the regulation! If you want to waive security, it is very simple. The regulation can be changed.”
Hojs pointed out that, at his suggestion, the government had introduced this option for ministers, who could waive their security protection for personal errands if they notified the police of this in advance. This further calls into question the President’s explanation. This claim was also confirmed by international lawyer Dr Miha Pogačnik, who said that, as a lawyer, the President should have known this: “Slovenian lawyers, it seems, need lifelong learning. The ‘rule of law’ and related mumbo jumbo is a relatively demanding matter.”
A naïve promise about carbon footprint
Even more awkward was the President’s remark that she is “also aware of the impact on the environment” and that the promise she made to measure it is actually “naïve.” This raises an uncomfortable question: if this promise was naïve, what does that mean for all the other promises she made when she took office? Is it possible that they, too, were merely appealing but had no real basis?
The President concluded her statement by emphasising that she rarely uses helicopters and that they are not a privilege but part of statehood. However, her attempt to appease the public has mainly raised new doubts.
Sara Kovač
