Lexical confusion reigns under the stars of the yellow-green government, indifferent to possible disturbances on the financial markets. In fact, Carige is a bank with thousands of depositors, listed on the Milan Stock Exchange, with many large and small shareholders and holders of savings shares, whose shares have been suspended from trading and whose market capitalization is close to zero. In this context, the shareholders cannot get rid of the shares while the depositors, although guaranteed by the special fund up to one hundred thousand euros, are waiting for the solutions that will be proposed by the commissioners.
The awkward attempt by the grillini to dress up nothingness with words, in the hope of being able to reassure their electorate about their supposed diversity from the hated Gentiloni government, is a symptom of this confusion and unacknowledged greed for a bank to occupy. Clumsy attempt doomed to failure, since the procedures for banking crises must be adopted as they are and therefore the appeal to diversity appears not only as a media trick, but above all as a serious electoral incursion into the delicate work of the commissioners who, at least in this start-up phase, I don't think they appreciate the political exploitation of the Carige case.
Likewise, I don't think the financial markets are calm, and the goliardic announcement of solutions that have not been adequately tested in the past can only make us stunned with expectation and concern. Our garrulous ministers would have done better if they had taken note of the regulations in force, referring the political controversy to the solutions that the commissioners will present to the supervisory authorities and the European Commission. But the electoral campaign has already started and the Carige case is too tempting to be dropped.
But even more puzzling is the bizarre discussion about the fate of Carige, its shareholders, its staff, its depositors and suppliers, and the financial networks that link it to the rest of the Italian and foreign banking system. In fact, the words "state bank" emerge from the hat of the most naive rulers, while others are content to propose the nationalization of Carige.
In common parlance, but also in recent history, the "state bank" is the one that governs monetary policy and issues money. I don't think Mr Di Maio has in mind to transform Carige into a Genoese state bank, leaving the euro, and having them mint and re-issue the Genovino or Mezzo Grosso. Maybe he meant something else. But since words make sense, clarity would be welcome.
Therefore, only the nationalization proposal remains on the announcement table, immediately defined by the commissioners as bizarre, albeit with more diplomatic words. To those who still give meaning to the words, the word nationalization brings to mind the nationalization of the electrical plants which took place in 1962 with a serious disbursement from the state coffers to repay the indemnities to the electrical companies; or going even further back in time, the confiscation by the State of the ecclesiastical axis. Di Maio plans to repeat these examples? Indeed, with intellectual shamelessness, our rulers claim, in order not to be denied the promises made and the commitments undertaken, that nationalization will be at no cost to the citizens or to the state budget. If so, it would be the first non-onerous nationalization by magic in history. But Di Maio says that if the government put money in, the citizens would have a bank in return. Does the vice president intend to refer to a public company whose shares are given away to every living citizen and at birth; including foreigners, Salvini permitting? These are concepts that should be clarified to public opinion and to Europe.
Since the embassies in Rome regularly inform the chancelleries of their respective countries about the political debate in Italy, what will they communicate about this bizarre adventure that risks turning from a lexical into a financial tragedy?
