This meeting aims to fix together with you someand guidelines of a reformist-liberal project which, if undertaken, would offer the country the possibility of recovering the lost ground and joining the countries with higher growth rates.
The starting point is that of a "operation truth". It must be clearly said that even if we are registering a growth rate
satisfactory enough, we are far from solving our problems. But we must not change course, but rather take advantage of the favorable situation both internally and internationally, however a structural strengthening of our system so that we can increase the speed of recovery and be able to withstand crises, should they occur.
As the title of our Conference already states, the starting points for real growth policies are Europe and competitiveness. After the crisis of recent years, Europe could be about to embark on a path of recovery, that is, an integration capable of promoting greater growth and full employment.
Italy cannot in any way think of detaching itself from Europe. Firstly for historical and geographical reasons, and secondly for the level of integration of our production chain. The ideas of those who deem it more convenient for us to leave the Euro and therefore focus everything on exports would bring little and temporary benefits, while the drawbacks would certainly be enormous. Exports are important but, by themselves, they will never be able to drive the entire economy (domestic demand played a decisive role this year too).
Above all, the proponents of a return to our national currency and therefore of a robust devaluation do not consider that in this way the incomes and assets of citizens would be cut abundantly. Other than having more money for social welfare, there would be more sacrifices for everyone, and in particular for the elderly, retirees and all those who have a fixed income and some money aside.
But to say that we have to stay in Europe because it's convenient for us, opens up the second problem, namely of "how" we have to stay there and what do we have to do to make our voices heard at the European relaunch table. And here the main weakness of our country stands out: the public debt.
The weight of our debt not only crushes the growth potential of the economy (the money spent on interest is subtracted from investments and consumption) but on a European level, it arouses growing apprehension among all the other partners. In recent times, at least two very critical fronts have opened up for us. On the one hand, the idea of rules for an orderly default of states with high debts has been put forward, even before they can demonstrate the impossibility of repaying it. On the other hand, but things are connected, there would be an attempt to impose ceilings on the positions in government bonds of the banks. But as has been demonstrated by some Italian economists, these policies would lead to outcomes that are diametrically opposed to those intended. That is, they would create more instability and greater risk of crisis.
The statement by Merkel and Sarkosy in Deauville on the Greek debt fully demonstrates this. In addition there are the new rerules on banks' NPLs that have caused great alarm because they risk compressing credit just at a time when our banks were emerging from a long crisis and our NPLs were reduced by more than 20 billion in just six months.
All this tells us that Europe is not a gala dinner. Must
stay there, but you need to have clear ideas on what to propose. No need to bang your fists on the table. We need to bring proposals and above all demonstrate that we have credibility in order to overcome the fears of other countries. Instead, many political forces seem to believe that the crisis has been overcome and that now it is possible to go back to broadening the scope of public spending by adjusting pensions and health care and at the same time reducing taxes. Too many parties confuse promises with proposals.
Unrealizable and, if implemented, counterproductive promises. A virtuous and not illusory road is the one indicated by prof Gianni Toniolo when he invited the various political forces to stipulate, before the elections, a pact which would commit them, in case of victory, to reducing the debt. Such a move made by responsible politicians, even before its concrete implementation, would positively change market expectations and Europe's attitude, so we could immediately enjoy some positive effects on interest rates and investments.
Ma There are various ways to reduce debt. Public spending must certainly be controlled by trying to raise the primary balance without increasing the tax burden, and if anything, rebalancing it between direct and indirect taxes. But what would be decisive is to try to raise the potential growth rate. And this depends on the competitiveness of the system. In recent decades we have lost a lot of ground because we have failed to adapt our economic system to the new needs of the global economy (incidentally this depends on technology and cannot be countered by the closure of borders and a return to nationalism) .
We need to make our legal and administrative system more friendly towards those who undertake, reform the Justice system, review the network of constraints of the PA, reform schools and universities in depth (as suggested by the OECD), modify our cities to improve the quality of life and production efficiency. Change welfare to make it suitable for a more mobile society and work, and push the labor market towards company bargaining to improve productivity and be able to raise wages.
It's about un set of changes that many refer to as "small reforms" but that perhaps they are not so small. I won't go into further detail, also because they are all themes that will certainly be explored further in the other interventions.
The problem within which politics is debated is that of finding consensus to do those things that would need to be done. And then we prefer to make promises, or envisage trees, as Berlusconi does, of plenty, or invent mysterious citizen's income, or propose to increase the deficit to 3% as Renzi says without knowing who to lend us the money from, all promises which we then in the end they will turn into bitter disappointments.
The past shows: in 2011 it was the total refusal of the League to reform pensions and to reduce the excessive expansion of the so-called "municipal socialism" that provoked our debt crisis and the long years of sacrifices that followed with cuts in pensions and to all much more drastic incomes. It's not the doctor's fault if the patient got worse due to carelessness!!
And instead I am convinced that illustrating to the citizens the convenience of a certain path based on the even gradual demolition of privileges and income positions, on the increase in opportunities for all, on the orderly development of civil life, is not impossible and I is in vain. It can be explained that the crisis cannot be resisted by closing oneself in one's fort, but by accepting the challenge of change which must naturally be managed with adapted tools to ensure the orderly transition towards more productive jobs. Fighting people's natural fears with fallacious promises can only push us into a sad and depressing decline.
It will not be an easy task, but we reformist-liberals who, as our history shows, have ensured immense progress for a large part of humanity (that is, we who are the true progressives) have an obligation to commit ourselves to this umpteenth battle for progress .
