I would suggest to the Government the utmost caution in taking the path of commissioning Ilva of Taranto, pursuant to the revised Marzano law, because in this way a "provisional commissioning" would be transformed, motivated by the need to start the reclamation of the site and to avoid closure of the plants in a real "expropriation" on whose legitimacy the Constitutional Court could (and should) have something to say. The idea then that the expropriation could be motivated by the strategic nature of the productions of Taranto is even more dangerous because it opens the way to the extension of this type of arbitrary procedure also to other plants and sectors (those who decide, in fact, what is strategic and what isn't?). The commissioner of Taranto must therefore remain a unique and unrepeatable case.
The way forward is another: it is for the government to assume a role of direction and coordination in the reorganization of the steel cycle, using for this purpose all the industrial policy instruments at its disposal, including financial ones. Until now, the restructuring of the Italian steel industry has been conditioned more by the initiative of the Judiciary (Taranto), by that of bankruptcy proceedings (Trieste and Piombino) and by the anachronistic vetoes of the EU than by the trends in the global steel cycle and by national needs. Even private entrepreneurs have struggled to do their part partly due to lack of funds and partly, perhaps, due to lack of courage. At this point, the intervention of the State to restore order to the sector and rationality to the restructuring appears inevitable.
Let's start with Terni. Closing the steel plant would mean losing the production of special steels, which is not possible. Therefore, everything must be done to avoid it. But the solution that is looming (the return of Thyssen) and which was announced with the agreement promoted by the Government and stipulated by the social partners appears provisional because it is (understandably) conditioned on the achievement of company objectives (reduction of costs and increase in productivity) which not even the Germans were able to achieve in the past. In other words: the steel mill can survive if it significantly reduces the costs of related industries (which are hypertrophic and expensive) and if it increases productivity, also through a review of company union relations (which are holding it back today) It's not simple but it is also the only possible way out while waiting for the EU to review its position.
As far as Trieste (the Servola ironworks) is concerned, the solution found is certainly the best possible while for Piombino we just have to cross our fingers and cheer because the Algerians are making it. In both cases, the will of the territories weighed heavily, which is not always a good advisor. It is to be hoped that this is not the case in this case.
The real problem, however, is Taranto. The revisited via della Marzano is, as already mentioned, very risky if not impassable. Apart from the possibility (the certainty) that the shareholders (Riva and partners) will challenge the seizure, the fact remains that such a gesture would send a catastrophic message to foreign investors: "Italy, like Venezuela, is a country in which the State can expropriate a company that it considers strategic”. It is not clear who, on this basis, can come to invest in Italy and why they should do so.
The way forward is therefore another and that is to encourage, without excluding the current shareholders, the creation of a consortium of Italian and foreign investors in the sector who can take the fate of the plants into their own hands, who complete the reclamation and reactivate with adequate investments the production. To this end, and in an admittedly transitory manner, the State could, through its financial institution (Cassa Depositi e prestiti, Strategic Fund, Fintecna, etc.) contribute to this consortium and accompany it for the time necessary to secure Ilva of Taranto under all profiles: administrative, judicial and productive. The State can, and in this case in all probability must, make a "portage". What it cannot and must not do is renationalise Ilva and, above all, expropriate it.
