Today, with the start of the technical table that he convened at Montecitorio, the president of the Chamber is moving towards the decisive phase his exploration in the crisis jungle opened with the resignation of the Conte government. Then he will draw the conclusions to report to the Quirinale. For Roberto Fico tasks like this are nothing new and he has shown a good aptitude for solving puzzles in the past. The puzzle facing him this time is particularly complicated, however there is a fact – which emerged from the consultations held last week by the President of the Republic and from the subsequent debate – which could perhaps make it easier.
The three main protagonists of the confrontation (5 Stars, Pd and Italia Viva) if, on the one hand, they are bearers of instances that are still considerably distant from each other, they share a peculiar situation: that they are all, albeit to varying degrees, traversed by internal tensions and afflicted by a misalignment, in some conspicuous cases, that it exists between the orientations of the parliamentary groups and those of the leaders of the respective reference parties. This is a mismatch which, if not remedied quickly, could result in a greater push for the balkanization of the Chambers and the increase in their rate of ungovernability.
The confrontation that begins this morning therefore takes place in a context that – like it or not – will have to be kept in mind by those who will try to make a synthesis between different positions. Formulas used in the past and, in truth, a bit worn out have returned to circulate these days: "government contract", "end of term agenda", "time schedule" and so on. The fact that, in such an uncertain situation, one wants to translate any agreement into a document written (a request made by Matteo Renzi and apparently accepted by the other interlocutors) is reasonable. But it seems even more necessary to avoid the mistake that weighed heavily on the negative epilogue of the second Conte government: that of having, in practice, disregarded the observance of art. 94 of the Constitution.
This prescribes that trust in the Government be granted by the Chambers "by means of a reasoned motion". It is a precept that is fused to the absence of a "mandate constraint" established by article 67 and charges the freedom of every parliamentarian to exercise his or her mandate responsibly. As a recent document by the Association of ex-Parliamentarians has pointed out, such a mechanism in fact requires every parliamentarian to make, even in disagreement with his own party, "a transparent, clear and binding choice" to remove the suspicion of a choice made for pure personal convenience. But if, with a cunning option, the "motivated motion" becomes a very generic two-line text lacking clarity as regards the Government's political guidelines, a confused situation is created which can lead, as has happened, in a disastrous outcome.
To get out of the crisis and ensure the country a government worthy of a dramatic situation such as the current one, it therefore seems essential that a very different line be taken. That is, that is fixed a perimeter of objectives, perhaps limited, but well defined at least on the issues on which clarity was lacking by the outgoing government. Starting with the policy on justice and from the sharp definition of a governance for the use, by Italy, of the funds of the Next Generation Eu. Two issues on which the Conte government has made repeated delaying choices, evidently underestimating the disruptive consequences. But today there is no more time for postponements.
