Share

Di Maio, Europe and the unsustainable grillino barter

The somersaults of the deputy prime minister grillino never end: first he threatens not to pay contributions to the European Union and then promises to reconsider if Brussels helps us more on migrants and basic income – But the goal is too open: to look for excuses to show that Europe is stepmother

Di Maio, Europe and the unsustainable grillino barter

''If the European Union gave us signs of help'' not only on migrants but "also on the fight against poverty and unemployment, with basic income, with the possibility of eliminating the Fornero law, we could repent". So Luigi Di Maio in a recent interview.

We have noticed that the minister-boy is not very familiar with the proper use of verbs, not only in terms of tenses and conjugations, but also their meaning. This time, however, he nailed the right word, perhaps due to a bad conscience that emerged suddenly and without his knowledge. It is no coincidence that Di Maio announces the yellow-green government's willingness to repent towards the European Union in the face of ''signals of help'' not only on migrants but also on the other bizarre objectives of the contract.

If we consult a dictionary we find this definition of the concept of repentance: ''realizing that one has made a mistake and correcting oneself''. Even in tax law, active repentance allows the taxpayer to remedy an error in the tax return before it is detected by the tax authorities. In any case, however, those who repent are aware of having made a mistake and take action to correct the mistake made. It may be that this admission by the minister is the result of a lack of confidence in the Italian language, but this time Di Maio is right: the controversy of the yellow-green majority towards the European Union is so cloying, dishonest and exploitative that, in order to repent , the Capinera trio that occupied Palazzo Chigi should cover their heads with ashes and apologise.

After Matteo Salvini's stunt with the blockade of the Italian military ship (which was first forbidden to land in one of our ports, then seized for days, with the crew and its cargo of "dead souls" in Catania ) Luigi Di Maio has begun to accuse the European Union of all responsibility for ''leaving Italy alone'' to face the invasion of the neghers (forgetting that it is precisely the two ringleaders who boast of having further reduced the number of landings, after the effects of Minister Minniti's drastic therapy).

Di Maio - backed up after days of silence by that fop Giuseppe Conte - threatened Brussels not to pay the contributions owed by Italy to the community budget. The trick is obvious: it's all about denouncing Europe for not doing its part and reiterating that the Dublin rules do not sufficiently guarantee Italy; but, at the same time, in acting in every possible way (in cahoots with the Visegrad countries) to derail the leaders who should set up a reform of that treaty.

Moreover, it is very easy to forget that of the 29,7 billion of flexibility (with respect to the EU budget rules) recognized to our country, from 2015 to 2018, a substantial part was attributed to the immigration emergency.

When working in a community it would be good practice to put yourself in the shoes of our partners, try to consider things from their point of view as well. The government - which a cynical and cheating destiny has wanted to assign to the Italians - constantly threatens to give a damn about the rules that the community has freely given itself; treats the European institutions and the governments of other countries as ruthless adversaries; incites and incites public opinion against a Union project that has no alternative in the return to the sovereignty of small countries; fails to fulfill the commitments undertaken in relation to major works of continental importance and interest; (stra) talks about nationalizations; calls for protectionist measures in a context created specifically to guarantee the free movement of goods, people, companies and capital.

Why should the European institutions trust charlatans and acrobats who only know how to utter accusations, insults and threats? But if even at the level of institutional relations it were decided, pro bono pacis, to meet Italy's requests again, who would be able to convince savers to do the same? This is why it would be urgent for the government to repent, without setting conditions. Because it is not Europe that is in the wrong, but the yellow-green executive.

comments