One of the most singular aspects of the "drole de crise" that has been going on for 12 days now is that three political exponents speak in an ever more peremptory way about the fate of Parliament who - although invested with different and important responsibilities - are united by the fact that they are not part of the Chambers. “Either Conte or the vote”, leaks from Palazzo Chigi and the secretary of the Democratic Party echoes him, Nicola Zingaretti, and Goffredo Bettini. A statement that clashes with the anathemas hurled just a few days ago against Matteo Renzi, branded as "irresponsible" and considered, due to the criticisms leveled against the Prime Minister and the consequent resignations of the two ministers of Italia Viva, author of a push towards the premature dissolution of Parliament.
But the line adopted by President Conte, which Zingaretti and Bettini appear to share, seems to ignore the fact that the IV parliamentarians, with a resolution adopted unanimously last Friday, expressed their willingness to "build a new pact" which projects on the entire legislature through a comparison "without vetoes or prejudices".
After all, one of the reasons for the contrast – the delegation for the Secret Services – was removed due to the choice made by the Conte himself.
As for the Recovery Plan – the first, unfortunate, version brought to the Council of Ministers on 7 December was withdrawn – work was underway on the text, improved, sent to the Chambers which must now be integrated with the time schedule of the works.
The Mef is dealing with this, in compliance with the "guidelines" just published by the Brussels Commission; in this way, moreover, one of the shortcomings of the Plan complained of at the time by Italia Viva is also addressed. The hottest topic remains open: the one relating to fund management methods, on the organizational structures and on the tools for controlling the effectiveness of the resources employed. It is a knot that must be resolved by February to conclude a complex and demanding job.
One wonders whether the support of a heterogeneous and ragged "fourth leg" or the contribution of a group that was already part of the government's action could contribute more to its positive outcome. Whether it is better, for example, the contribution of the economist, deputy of Iv, Luigi Marattin or that of Senator Ciampolillo.
If then - as many argue - the doors of the majority would still be open for the parliamentarians of Italia Viva but not for its founder, then it would be more transparent to say: "Either without Renzi or the vote”. Thus a "conventio ad excludendum" would take the form, no longer towards a political force but towards a single parliamentarian.
However one wishes to judge such a hypothesis, one crucial point remains to be clarified. If there is the risk of early voting instead of flaunting either-or, it becomes essential, to thwart it, to make a serious comparison and ascertain whether the conditions exist for the formation of a majority that is politically more cohesive and more capable of achieving its objectives programmatic, compared to the one that entered into suffering after the 156 votes laboriously collected in the Senate on the evening of 19 January.
It is an arduous yet dutiful commitment in the interest of the country. It would be desirable for the Prime Minister to take charge of it; but, if this does not occur, the opportunity may emerge (as happened in analogous situations in the past) to entrust this indispensable work to an explorer.
Before plunging the country into an electoral appointment which – in the current dramatic situation – is judged ruinous by vast sectors of public opinion, efforts certainly cannot be spared. Especially if one thinks of taking the path of voting not due to incurable political differences but due to personal intolerance or low profile calculations.
°°°The author was deputy director of Sun 24 Hours and senator of the Left Democrats group.
