"Reducing the national co-financing quota of the 2014-2020 European structural funds for Sicily, Campania and Calabria would penalize precisely the three regions of the South that are today economically weakest", says Carlo Trigilia, full professor of Economic Sociology at the "Cesare Alfieri" of Florence and until six months ago Minister for Territorial Cohesion in the Letta government.
“Nothing new under the sun”, bitterly comments Adriano Giannola, president of Svimez, professor of banking economics at the Federico II University of Naples. “A bizarre idea, I'm completely against it”, says Gianfranco Viesti, professor of applied economics at the Aldo Moro University of Bari, between 2009 and 2010 councilor for the South of the Puglia region. "Halving the national co-financing could also be accepted, but on condition that the available resources are used quickly and well", is the opinion of Alessandro Panaro, head of Infrastructure and Public Finance of Srm, Studies and Research for the South.
The government's proposal, not yet formalized in a legislative proposal, to halve the share of national co-financing for the 2014-2020 European funds destined for Sicily does not arouse enthusiasm among scholars and experts on the subject of the economic gap between the two Italys , to Campania and Calabria, in a nutshell, a dry cut of 8-10 billion. "So it rains in the wet", is the first comment of those who are against. “But if these Regions can't even spend the EU resources for the seven-year period 2007-2013…”, retort the supporters of this idea filtered by Palazzo Chigi. They add that the proposal, when implemented, will be able to offer a contribution, albeit limited, to the state budget for the current and next year.
"Given that the possibility of reducing the co-financing quota is envisaged by European regulations", argues Carlo Trigilia, "it will be necessary to verify the real intentions of the government in terms of timing and methods of application of the new regulation" (which could be included in the decree "sblocca-Italia", the approval of which is scheduled for August 29 - ed.).
"Of course, it is singular", adds the ex-minister, "the hypothesis of a reduction in the national co-financing of European funds destined for productive investments to restart a development blocked in the economically weaker regions, and therefore more in need of financial resources . We would find ourselves faced with a real surrender of the State with respect to the objective of restarting growth not only in the South but throughout Italy as a whole; given that, of one hundred euros invested in the South, forty go to central-northern companies receiving European funds for the implementation of projects in the South".
According to Trigilia, if the idea of the government goes through, two variants can be imagined. “The first”, he says, “a straight halving of the national quota, would be a clear political defeat for the government. The second could be the establishment, with the resources (in whole or in part) subtracted from national co-financing, of a parallel fund linked to the implementation of projects in the South at a later time and therefore not subject to European rules and deadlines. A compromise solution which, also considering the chronic slowness of the Southern Regions, could also be acceptable. But which unfortunately would lend itself to the inevitable 'assaults on diligence' along the lines of what happened with the resources of the Fas, the Fund for underutilized areas set up by the 2003 financial law, which has become a sort of public ATM which has been used for emergencies and unforeseen all types".
“But the real challenge, in terms of European funds, is to use them well. Giving up”, added Trigilia, “the traditional practice of fragmenting into thousands and thousands of small interventions too often aimed at the electoral ambitions of short-sighted local administrators. Instead, to finally take the path that had been traced by the Letta government: a few large-scale interventions within the framework of a well-defined national strategy. A strategy set, for the Centre-North, on the modernization of Made in Italy with robust injections of innovation, on internationalization and digitization. And, for the South, on the extension of the market economy, agriculture and agro-industry, cultural and environmental assets. While, for the whole country, it is crucial to invest in improving human capital, and therefore in education and training”.
Not even Adriano Giannola hides his doubts about the proposal that the government could implement before the end of August. “It seems to me that, given the same European funds, the reduction in co-financing could actually produce a cut in the resources destined for the South. A purpose”, comments the president of Svimez, “which seems to me to be in line with a tradition which – taking the inefficiency of the southern regions as a pretext – instead of replacing them, it reduces spending with 'benefits' for the state budget. And perhaps allocating the surplus resources to 'urgent' interventions, such as layoffs, etc., in other areas of the country”.
"If the facts should be confirmed", observes Gianfranco Viesti, "the indiscretion according to which a quota of public investments destined for the South should be diverted towards schools and research in the rest of the country, I would consider this choice profoundly wrong".
As for the hypothesis, also circulated, of capitalizing the "savings" thus obtained in a restricted fund to be released later on but always for the benefit of the three "expropriated" Regions, Viesti says: "I strongly advise against this solution already practiced with the Fas, the Fund for underutilized areas, on which the government drew for interventions of various kinds. I think of Tremonti when he directed the resources of the Fas that were bound to the weakest areas towards other destinations".
"It must be recognized that the accusations of slowness and inefficiency leveled at the southern regions with regard to the use of European financial aid are at least partially founded", says Alessandro Panaro. “But the perplexities aroused by the prospect of a reduction in the national co-financing of the European structural funds remain understandable. But be careful: it cannot be ignored that the quality of choices and results is at least as crucial as the quantity of financial resources. And then there is no need to clash over halving yes - halving no, but it is necessary to focus on a few projects and a few strategic sectors ".
“In terms of delays in the use of EU funds, then, the responsibility does not lie only with the southern regions; on the contrary, a good part of it can be attributed to the ministries”, adds Panaro. “Because, with regard to transport, research, education, security and other sectors, the operational programs are national. And even at the level of state administrations, the percentage of expenditure of European funds is very similar to that of the Regions. So it would seem that the idea of centralizing the management of regional expenditure in Rome would not solve the problem of delays”.
“The main problem of the development of the South is still that of choice”, concludes Panaro. “We should focus on three, four, at most five strategic objectives that respect territorial vocations. Which? For some time now, SRM has been proposing a short list that includes ports, tourism, agri-food, aerospace, automotive, green economy. But so far we have witnessed a multiplication of objectives: a condition that does not produce real growth or create employment”.
