Being aware of the privilege geographic location of Slovenia on the crossing of the most important international traffic flows, which offer numerous opportunities for transport, maritime, logistic and other economic activities,

proceeding from the declared maritime orientation of the Republic of Slovenia,

worried about the incomprehensible and harmful not-responding of the competent Minister of Infrastructure and some Slovenian politicians and officials regarding the construction of the second track Koper–Divača,

worried that without the second track Slovenia will stuck on the side-line and

angry because the biased elaboration of the ordered study ITF-OECD

in cooperation with five Slovenian associations for roads, Družba za raziskave v cestni in prometni stroki Slovenije (Society for research in road and transport sector of Slovenia) and with the support of Združenje za promet Gospodarske zbornice Slovenije (Association for transport at the Chamber of Commerce of Slovenia)

we are founding the civil initiative »For the second track« and are signing the next

Slovenia was always closely connected with the sea. During the Austrian – Hungarian monarchy the Port of Trieste was its door to the world. After the Second World War the historical circumstances and the political interests of the big world powers cut off Trieste from the home territory and thus we lost our national maritime connection.  The progressive Slovenian businessmen were aware of importance of Koper, which this town had already in time of the Venetian Republic, as well as the fact that Rijeka does not mean a domestic port for the ambitious development plans and needs of the Slovenian economy. For the establishing of the Port of Koper we can be grateful to all those individuals who had the strong will and the long term vision and were aware that the own port is very important for the development of the Slovenian economy. 

The states, as the highest authorities of national communities are the product of different political-economic decisions in single historical periods; therefore they are not permanent in their forms as empires, kingdoms, federations or confederations. Regardless the circumstances the state with all its branches of authorities has to be the representative of the nation and its highest, strongest and sovereign representative.  We are just in the period, when we in the procedure of the international arbitration prove our historical connection with open maritime routes. Didn`t we learn anything at all from the happening regarding the definition of the border in the Bay of Piran and of the contact with open sea? Shall we still rely to our neighbours at adopting the key strategic decisions, important for the further development of our country (of course within the wider Europe Community)? Shall we in terms of the good cooperation blindly believe to the closed agreements and different promises or shall we rather rely on our own forces, learn something and adequately react on the base of the past, unfortunately often negative experiences? Who assures us that today in this globalised world and in time, when everything is on sale, the foreigners, regardless how god neighbours they are, will represent and consider our interests? What does the abandoning of the corridor 10 in direction Munich–Salzburg–Jesenice–Ljubljana–Zagreb–Belgrade–Thessaloniki tell us? The density of traffic corridors in direction North Adriatic –Central Europe (Trieste–Villach–Graz–Vienna, Koper–Ljubljana–Budapest, Rijeka–Zagreb–Budapest) within the corridor 9 shows the big importance and interest for the connection of the North Adriatic with Central European and East European hinterland.

The agony of planning of the second track between Koper and Divača lasts for already twenty years. In diplomatic circles we can hear that Italy is causing big problems, as it tries to impact on geo-strategic railway connections of Slovenia with the initiative of the connection of the Port of Koper and Slovenia on the Baltic-Adriatic corridor over the railway line Trieste–Koper instead with the second track between Koper and Divača. The most active was the former European delegate and the director of the Port Authority of Venice Paolo Costa. In the year 2004 the Government of Silvio Berlusconi with the help of the president of the European Commission Romano Prodi achieved the omission of the second track from the priority projects TEN-T, but the Government of Anton Rop, M.Sc., with the efficient action and lobbying at Berlusconi managed anyway that to priority projects on the V. Pan European corridor two equivalent railway connections remain, namely Trieste–Divača and Koper–Divača. In the same year the integrated transport policy was prepared, with the emphasis on European and world logistic connections (which was removed by the new Government and replaced with another one) and the National spatial plan for the second track, which was formally adopted in the next year when the Government was managed by Janez Janša.

In the continuation the Italian government managed to persuade the politicians in Brussel that the second track is not important, also due to insufficient activity of Slovenia at preparing for the construction.  Italy presented as the priority project the construction of the section Trieste–Divača and changed with purpose the alignment or the course of the section and the connection to the second track two times. Thus it caused the delay of the spatial site selection of this line in Slovenia and consequently the loss of time and finances for the construction, regardless the written assurances of the Italian minister Pietro Lunardi on supporting of the construction of the second track. Besides investments of Italian banks into container terminal on Rijeka due to the railway connection Rijeka–Budapest, which runs by Slovenia, Italy strives for the construction of the section Koper–Trieste and thus for the connection of the Port of  Koper on the Baltic-Adriatic corridor over the Port  of Trieste and the Pontebanna railway line with Austrian. Thus it can happen that the best freight logistic flow will pass by Slovenia. One of the four important maritime routes between Asia and Europe is leading to the northern Adriatic. This means more and more containers and cars in Ravenna, Venice, Trieste, Koper and Rijeka, but it seems that the neighbours are more aware of this as we are.

If Italy did not even hide the intention to be against the construction of the second track also before Slovenia would start to construct it, we alone caused ourselves a lot of harm because of incompetence and egoistic self-interest of some individuals. So let us not be naive, let us combine our forces and find the sources and ways for the realisation of the construction of the second track as our vital, long term development strategic project.

Let us look in the past and analyse the present development of the Port of Koper. At the opening its share of transit was scarcely two percent, in 15 years this share grew on nearly a quarter of all traffic. In international transport the Port of Koper became more and more important mostly for the Central European countries with no the exit to the sea. In the year 1976 the share of transit exceeded half of the cargo handling, in the year 1991 it was already more than two thirds. Also the total quantity of cargo handling was increasing all the time, this proves that the Port of Koper is due to its position and active development very important for the Slovenian economy  as well as for the neighbouring and more distant countries of the Central and East Europe.

Since 1991 to 2014 the volume of cargo handling in the Port of Koper increased for five-times (from 4 million tonnes in the year 1991 to 19 million tonnes in the year 2014), almost all due to taking over of final customers from various North European ports. Thus on the European transport map also the Slovenian transport route to the Central Europe became important. The port developed to the leading Adriatic port thus considering the volume of the most pretentious categories of cargo handling as well as high technological solutions, reliability, competitiveness and generated financial added value.

The Port of Koper transports 53 % of all cargo handled by the railways and in these terms it is among the first three European ports. It is a god example of in long term development orientated port. The existing single track line connection between Koper and Divača is one of the most occupied lines in Europe (the 24 hour capacity utilization is nearly 90 %), and due to its configuration belongs to category of heavy mountain railway lines.  As such it is exposed to many unforeseen events and the extreme risk for traffic interruption.

The Government of the Republic of Slovenia defined the project of construction of the second track Divača–Koper as a priority project, namely on the base of the next reasons:

• Establishing of the standard TEN-T on the Mediterranean and Baltic-Adriatic corridor is in accordance to the strategy of transport development in the Republic of Slovenia and in this context the implementation of the second track within this corridor is very important for the Republic of Slovenia.
• The complete investment documentation is elaborated.
• The cultural – protection consent has been obtained, the water consent has been issued, as well as the supplementary decision for environmental protection approval for bridging of the brook Glinščica, the agreement on implementation of compensatory measures due to interventions into the landscape park Beka has been concluded and the building permits will fully be acquired in this year.
• The standpoint of the Government of the Republic of Slovenia is that financing of this project will be implemented besides with the EU funds also by one of the forms of public private partnership.
• The construction of the second track will enable to Port of Koper to use out its full potential for development.
• At the planned dynamic of the cargo handling growth in the Port of Koper and the unchanged ratio of the freight transport by the road and on the railway in the year 2020 the capacity of the modernised existing line Divača–Koper, which has all elements of a mountain line, will be reached.
• The second track will enable discharging of the road of the heavy freight traffic and reducing of the greenhouse emissions and dust particles, danger for health.
• The cost and benefit analysis, which includes the direct and external benefits, shows the eligibility of the project of construction of the second track Divača–Koper in the 50-years period by considering the 5.5% discount rate.
• If we consider the macroeconomic impacts of the construction and the impact on the activity of economic subjects the construction of the second track is economically justified.
• With the project the Republic of Slovenia assures the standards of the TEN-T corridor network until the year 2023. In case that these measures would not be implemented there is a risk that at the assessment in the year 2023 we will lose this corridor.
• The project has also other impacts as are: on employment, increasing of GDP, increasing of added value of the railway transport, impacts on the logistic sector, on taxes, etc.

Besides the stated arguments we have to consider also the main legal commitments adopted by the Slovenian policy in recent years in connection with the Port of Koper and its importance for the further economic development of Slovenia and with that associated construction of the second track Divača–Koper:

• Already in the beginning of March 1991 the than Assembly adopted the Resolution on the Maritime strategy of Republic of Slovenia, from which the extreme importance of the Port of Koper proceeds. Therefore »as the priority, the transport connections with the Austrian and Hungarian border have to be established, which will be equivalent to the connections of competitive ports». This diction includes with no doubt also the second track Koper–Divača.
• In October 1995 the National Assembly adopted the National Programme for the development of the Slovenian railway infrastructure, which is still in force, though it has been realised in a very low extend (about 12 %). It foresees explicitly the construction of the second track Divača–Koper in the length of 45.8 km in the period from the year 1998 to 2000 (point 5.2.2).
• In April 2004 the Government of RS under the management of Anton Rop, M.Sc. classified the second track under the priorities of the EU. Shortly after that the National Spatial Plan was elaborated and formally adopted in the year 2005.
• In October 2010 the National Assembly adopted the Resolution on the National programme for the development of maritime of RS, from which the necessity after the construction of the second track is also evident.
• In July 2015 the Government of RS under the leading of Miro Cerar, Ph.D.  adopted the Strategy of Transport development in RS, from which the necessity after the construction of the second track also proceeds.
• In July 2015 the National Assembly adopted the Declaration on foreign policy of the Republic of Slovenia. Already in the first part among the values, legal basis and the geopolitical position it is emphasized that the Republic of Slovenia is a »Central European and a Mediterranean country, in the heart of the Alpine-Adriatic-Danube region and at the crossroads of the Western Europe and the Western Balkans. The Republic of Slovenia is a maritime country.  Among the priority areas and the areas of our foreign policy the »strengthening of political and economic bonds on the national and the regional level in Alpine-Adriatic-Danube area with the states of the Central Europe and on the level of the Central European relations« is also stated as the »support to inclusion of the Republic of Slovenia in the Trans European transport and energy network, considering its central and transient geographical position, with the enforcement of Koper as the leading North Adriatic port in connection with the Baltic-Adriatic  traffic corridor.«
• At the end of July 2015 on the base of the Declaration on foreign policy of the Republic of Slovenia the Government of RS defined the text of the Strategic document of foreign policy of the RS with the title Slovenia: safe, successful and respected in the world – foreign policy of Republic of Slovenia. One of the key massages is: »Between the policies of EU in terms of development, for Slovenia the integration in Trans European transport network, which is closely connected with our central geographical position, with the Port of Koper and the connection on the transport axle Baltic – Adria and by this also with our position in the Alpine-Adria-Danube area, in the Central Europe and in Mediterranean, is of the key importance. These geopolitical areas, which are also our most important markets and the common cultural space, will be in focus of the activity of the Slovenian foreign policy«.
• Let us be a serious, self- confidential and sovereign European country, which is aware of its importance and the role in the European area and let us therefore enforce our strategic interests.

The study is based on a series of missed and incomplete assumptions or data (for instance completely unrealistic cost analysis of the hinterland terminal) on existing situation and guidelines for the further development of the Port of Koper and the logistic sector in Slovenia and in Central Europe. The study considers only the short-term impacts (in the period of 3–7 years).

With the study the hinterland truck terminal in Divača is proposed as the most appropriate short term alternative to the construction of the second track Divača–Koper. For us this proposal is harmful thus from the technological as well as  the economical point of view, as it means the increasing of costs of logistic operations for nearly two times (additional loading and  unloading of cargo), that the final customer is in no case willing to pay. Besides that such a measure would mean an additional big charge of the Slovenian highway (additionally 1500 trucks between Koper and Divača in a day). Here we should also be aware of the commitments that Slovenia gave relating to the reduction of greenhouse gases. The Government of the Republic of Slovenia adopted the Operative programme on reduction of emissions in July 2003, corrected it in the year 2004, revised in the year 2006, and adopted a new one in the year 2009 and in January 2014 the still valid version until the year 2020. In all programmes transport is exposed as the second biggest source of emissions, therefore the proposal of the study is unreasonable as it would mean the additional increasing of the road transport, though on a short distance Koper–Divača. The proposal is even in contrast to the adopted Operative programme for the reduction of emissions of greenhouse gases. Transport is the second largest source of greenhouse gas emissions in Slovenia and represents a quarter of all emissions of carbon dioxide. Comparing with the year 1986 in the year 2004 the emissions were for 112 % higher, and in the period 2000–2004 they grew with an average annual rate of 3 percentages. Thus the emissions from transport are critical; therefore their mastering is of the key importance for the fulfilling of commitments from the Kyoto agreement. The increasing of heavy freight vehicles transit over Slovenia which increased significantly since Slovenia joined to EU is of particular concern. Because of the basic territorial principle of calculating of emissions in evidences also the emissions from the sold motor fuel are considered. At rather low excise taxes this means that in national evidences also the emissions from the transport work, which was not carried out in Slovenia are attributed (so called fuel tourism).

For the reduction of emissions from transport it is necessary to:

• Implement in practice the measures of transport policy; redirect the freight traffic to the railways, to promote  the public passenger traffic with the introduction of the single ticket, to improve the infrastructure, to promote other  types of travelling (for instance cycling, walking) etc.;
• To improve the efficiency of vehicles: adoption of the strategy EU for the reduction of specific emissions of CO₂ of new vehicles until the year 2012, regular inspections of vehicles, economic driving, etc.

Transport is the key sector for achieving the national goals until the year 2020. The measures on this area will be orientated to control the greenhouse gas emissions and are therefore of the key importance for strengthening of activities and explicit implementation of measures, in particular the promotion and competitiveness of the public passenger traffic, promotion of the sustainable freight transport, increasing of the energy efficiency of road motor vehicles and the promotion of the not motorised forms of transport.

The authors of the study obviously do not know the basis of functioning of the logistic chain, specific for the Port of Koper; otherwise they would not suggest such technological and business absurd solutions. The evaluated condition in the study OECD is not treated in detail and argued. The study includes the next deficiencies:

• The doubt on the growth of cargo handling in the Port of Koper and on further development of the Port of Koper is strongly expressed, though the data show the further growth  (for instance of the container handling about 15 % per year).
• The doubt is expressed, namely if the high standards on line and also in tunnels are necessary, and alike, though the level of standards is defined by European standard for corridors TEN-T and these should be taken into account.
• The estimated value of the construction of the second track is globally estimated as not suitable. The real value and the possible models would be given only by an open international public procurement.
• As the best solution the construction of the hinterland terminal is proposed, though it is not elaborated in detail, in particular not in terms of transport technology and logistic.
• The conclusions of the economic viability are based on extremely exposed short-term impacts.

The second track would enable the further growth and development of the Slovenian logistic industry as one of the strategic sectors in Slovenia which is, despite of the weak infrastructure, intensively growing already for 20 years. Each additional million of cargo handling in the Port of Koper represents the 500 new working places in the hinterland logistic chain, what is confirmed also by the expertise of Dušan Mramor, Ph.D., professor at the Ljubljana Faculty of economics and the current Minister of Finances.

At presumption of a closed financial construction of the complete investment about 50 % could be co-financed from EU (CEF) funds. The railway connection between Koper and Divača would be shorter for  16.5 km, this represents together with the more suitable configuration of the line at the present volume of transport (10 million tonnes per year) 27 million EURO of incomes only from operative transport costs. 

The second track would essentially increase the competitiveness of the Slovenian transport route (Adriatic-Central Europe) as it would mean a shorter, faster, more efficient and cheaper railway connection.  

The investment would create a line of synergetic economic effects that Jože P. Damijan, Ph.D. from Ljubljana Faculty of economics wrote about (Estimation of future freight flows of the Port of Koper and the national economic impacts of different variants of transport connections of the port with the hinterland countries, Ljubljana, September 2012). We could learn from developed economies. For instance Austria started the investments into the railway connections towards south and east. In the next years the investments will exceed the total value of 15 billion EURO.

The statements that the second track is not economical are not true, as well as also the sceptical forecasts that it would not be possible to finance the construction.  The professors of economy Jože P. Damijan, Ph.D. and Aleš Groznik, Ph.D.  recently confirmed the forecasts again, that at the present trend of the cargo handling growth in the Port of Koper the first track will be saturated already after four years. This means that a part of the freight will be redirected to the roads, and mostly to the neighbouring ports. They state that the connection of the Baltic-Adriatic corridor in direction Koper–Pragersko–Šentilj respectively Hodoš in terms of the necessary investments into the construction of the second track and the modernisation of the rest of sections per a tonne of freight is with no doubt more appropriate as the Austrian version, namely cheaper for two times for nearly double quantity of freight. The complete Slovenian railway project would in the period of 20 years bring about 9.4 billion EURO of additional GDP,  the total impact of public and private investments on our section of the Baltic-Adriatic corridor would in two decades exceed 12 billion EURO of additional GDP and also  5 billion in time of use of the infrastructure. It would create 3000 working places during the construction and later also 6000 working places in logistic sector. Under the presumption that the second track would cost 1.35 billion EURO, the 25 % of financial means could be obtained from EU funds (385 million EURO), 75 % would be financed with the credit at the European Investment Bank and with bonds. The annual annuity would be between 18 and 51 million EURO and would be assured from the concession fee that the Port of Koper pays to the state (in terms of the foreseen growth of traffic this would be between 5 and 9.5 million per year), with the dividends of the Port (6 to 10 million), fee of Slovenian Railways (6.7 to 12.7 million) and with the »petrol cent« (22 to 27 million). At the same time we should not forget the not used cooperation with Bavaria, with some interesting gigantic ship-owners (for instance Maersk), the all in more powerful China, and alike.

An eventual accident on this environmentally extremely sensitive alignment of the existing railway line Koper and Divača  can cross one of the key transport arteries between Adriatic and the Central Europe. This means that the freight would be for a long time redirected to other alternative routes, of course outside Slovenia.

Without the investment into the construction of the second track Divača–Koper in the year 2023 Slovenia will for sure fallout from the network of the key European railway corridors. This means the end of the European funds for the modernisation and the development of the Slovenian railway infrastructure. The competitiveness of the Slovenian logistic industry will decrease significantly. The complete sector will start to stagnate and consecutively to die. The logistic sector generates nearly 10 % of GDP and this is certainly not a figure that could be neglected.

Regarding the standpoint of the Government of RS, that the investment in the second track Divača–Koper cannot be financed from the public means it make sense to announce immediately the international tender, open for all forms of public-private partnership financing of the construction, maintenance and exploitation of the  second track. On this way we would gain qualitative answers about the market price of the project and in which extend the previous studies were true and justified.

Therefore we appeal to the Minister of Infrastructure, to recognise finally the exceptional delicacy of this case and the risks of postponing of the construction and to prepare and publish immediately the international tender. In case of a positive answer a private partner would be selected with the proposed model, the means for co-financing (up to 50% of European funds) would be obtained and the construction could start.

If the answer will be negative and we are not willing to invest public funds, we have to give up the project and to face the consequences of abandoning the construction of the second track Divača–Koper, about which we have already spoken.

Is it thus clear to us that without the adequate transport infrastructure there is no economic growth of Slovenia? Are we aware what does this mean for the Port of Koper and the Slovenian Railways? Shall we become a lonely island in the middle of the developed world because of hesitation and indecision?

Let us hope that common sense will prevail.

October 2015

Andrej Godec, Ph.D.

Zvonimir Britovšek

Prof. Marko Pavliha, Ph.D.