The Def approved by the Council of Ministers it tells us of an Italy that will still have to walk the razor's edge for a long time. 2012 is, as we knew, a year of recession to such an extent that GDP will drop by 1,2% according to the slightly optimistic estimates of the Government. 2013 should see a slight recovery (+0,5%) while other international analysis centers such as the IMF forecast that the fall in income should continue. The public finances will certainly improve, but the balanced budget in 2013 will not be achieved. Only taking into account the negative economic situation, as agreed at the European level, it is estimated that we will have an asset (called structural because adjusted for the effects of the economic situation) of 0,6%. Net of the aid granted to countries in difficulty such as Greece, Portugal and Ireland, debt will begin to fall, reaching 118 of GDP, before falling to 110 in 2015.
What do these numbers mean? There are positive aspects because it can be said that overall public finances are and will remain under control even in an extremely difficult economic situation, not only in Italy but in Europe. This has cost great sacrifices to the Italians who have been called to pay new taxes for a significant amount. However, it is vain to believe that other avenues would have been possible. All those who scream about the lack of growth, starting with the trade unions, are however careful not to say how concretely this growth would have been feasible. With the usual assets? But come on, what is the Imu (the tax most hated by Italians) if not an ordinary property tax extended to everyone?
But these numbers show that there are still many negative aspects in Italy that require a high level of attention if we don't want to fall back into the black hole of default that we touched on just five months ago. Moreover, Monti clearly said that to regain credibility and trust among investors, it is necessary to maintain the course just undertaken for a certain time, carry forward the structural reforms we need and restore competitiveness to the country in order to put it in a position to accelerate the pace of development. In this context, Monti has not failed to throw a dig at the parties, recalling that the restoration of long-term credibility also depends on how much the parties will be able to reform themselves and the institutions to make everyone understand that, after the interlude of the caretaker government, there will not be a return to the previous trend, i.e. politics based on waste and patronage, but that the reformist policy will continue and that both the machinery of the state and the functioning of the markets will continue to be made increasingly efficient.
But this is precisely the most critical aspect of our situation and the most evident shortcoming of the economic policy plan contained in the Def. It is not known exactly what Monti and the secretaries of the majority parties said during dinner on Tuesday. One suspects, also according to Monti's sentences regarding the parties, that it was a question of a dialogue between the deaf. The parties want development but no one has an organic and coherent plan to activate it. Alfano does not want the VAT increase, Camusso the reduction of taxes on labour. Right things, but to make them possible you need to indicate where you can get the resources to do them.
And here the famous "ideona" enters the field to have a little development that Passera claims does not exist because in his opinion, development is the result of a whole series of adjustments on many aspects of our economic structure, each of which can make a small contribution to the construction of a different, more dynamic and more competitive structure. And it is true that the degradation of our system is at such a point as to paralyze any initiative (except fraudulent ones). In fact, Passera has proposed the revision of the rules for the faster construction of infrastructures, the reorganization of incentives for companies to finance truly worthy initiatives, the revision of the energy system and bureaucracy, to reduce the costs weighing on businesses and citizens. These are all necessary measures, as well as the one to pay off the public administration's debts to businesses, but all of them will unfold their effects in a very short time and in any case none is decisive in itself to get us out of the recession.
Does this “idea” exist? It is difficult to say that a single provision can magically solve all the problems that have become entangled around the body of our economic system over so many years of bad administration. However, there is an element missing from the Def, as well as from the speeches of Monti and Passera, namely that of drastic cuts in public spending so as to be able to reduce taxes on businesses and citizens in a visible and not only symbolic way. Only if the knife is plunged into the 800 billion euro of public spending will it be possible to have resources to reduce taxes. Nor is it enough to say that part of the revenues deriving from the fight against tax evasion will be destined for the reduction of Irpef on the lowest incomes. In this case there would be a fair effect of income redistribution but not a drop in the overall tax burden which now exceeds 45% of GDP. Without a decisive drop in taxes and therefore an increase in the competitiveness of our companies, there will be no recovery.
But why is there so much reluctance to tackle public spending cuts? Perhaps because it is difficult, but perhaps because the interests to be touched would be so great that no one feels like engaging in such a battle. Thinning out the institutional levels, cutting the costs of politics, eliminating useless entities, preventing the patronage of resources from being wasted would certainly be painful for those who have built their comfortable nest around those flows. But this should be one more reason to act. It would be one more argument of equity and justice. In fact, it is not fair that the crisis condemns many workers in companies affected by the crisis and does not affect those who work in parasitic organizations, well protected from competition and changing market trends. Yet Giarda moves with lead feet, Grilli doesn't seem to be passionate about the subject, while the parties want everything except to thin out their bureaucracies or disappoint their customers. And therefore the theme of the cuts, which perhaps in itself will not be an "ideona", but it is certainly a very important idea to make a change in the direction of recovery, remains for now in the background. And we continue to walk among many taxes and a harsh recession.
