- effects of the Coronavirus even before the lungs, they are being seen in the brains of many politicians and commentators who do nothing but blame Brussels for the inadequate or delayed response to the spread of the epidemic. The most pro-Europeans limit themselves to saying, shaking their heads, that this time Europe has disappointed and that if we don't change pace, we will soon have to agree with Salvini who claims that the European Union is not only useless, but also harmful . Most celebrate with great joy the end of the hated austerity rules which, according to them, have prevented the growth of our economy.
They are all dangerous nonsense which, if not rigorously countered, can strengthen that common feeling that tends to look for the "guilty" of our misfortunes outside of us, so as to relieve us of any previous responsibility and any serious commitment for the future.
Few try to insert elements of rationality into this general lamentation. He did it on Corriere della Sera Giuliano Pisapia with an article that perhaps the same editors of Courier have not quite understood, in which he demonstrates that it is the states that have not wanted to hand over the necessary powers to the EU in sectors such as immigration or health, and that indeed the Council of heads of state and government of the countries has sought in all ways to increase its power at the expense of the Brussels Commission. This is also true for the economy since no one wants to give up power in terms of taxation and public spending. Along the same lines Massimo Cacciari who hopes in the foresight of the Italian and European political class to implement, alongside the emergency measures, those profound changes that are necessary to adapt our country to modernity, and return to a decent pace of development.
Federico Fubini, on Courier, not only accuses Brussels of having done little, but sees in the Lagarde's "gaffe". the demonstration that the Germans and the countries of the North want to push Italy to the brink of bankruptcy in order to dictate the conditions for a true recovery of our economy. A cure blood and tears like in Greece. According to the sovereigns it is even a robbery attempt, in order to be able to buy our best companies at bargain prices and in any case to cut the legs of our competitive capacity.
It would be enough to look seriously at recent history and at the potential offered by belonging to the EU, to understand that things are completely different from how they are told. In the first place, the criticism of the "stupid" constraints of the Maastricht Treaty is not appropriate because all the other European countries have grown in recent years, including those who have needed help from the State Rescue Fund (ESM), while unemployment is at an all-time low. Italy is the only exception, to our demerit.
Fubini, in particular, argues that in the present situation the ECB has done too little. In reality, if he had carefully read the interview that the Italian member of the ECB directorate, Fabio Panetta, gave to his newspaper, he would have learned that the central bank has increased its purchases of securities by 120 billion for this year but that these purchases can be made in different proportions from country to country to prevent anomalous shifts in spreads by the markets. In any case, we would be entitled to 20-25 billion, that is, a figure equal to the greater deficit foreseen by the emergency measures adopted by the Government.
In addition, the taps have been opened loans to credit companies at negative rates for an amount up to 3000 billion lire euros with further interest rate advantages for loans aimed at SMEs. Naturally Panetta underlines that there is also a problem of guarantees on these credits that banks could grant to small businesses, but this is the task of the States which already have guarantee funds in place that could be strengthened (which is also foreseen in the Government decree) .
Sure we are heading into a very severe recession. No one is able to calculate exactly di how much will the decline in GDP be. Much will depend on the duration of the pandemic, but if Trump's forecasts are taken for granted, it could go as far as June-July. In this case we could have a fall in world GDP in the first half of the single digit shows 20% or even more.
Focusing on Italy, we must clearly understand the need to act immediately, as Cacciari states, on two levels: on the one hand, to face the emergency and at the same time prepare the factors of production in the most efficient way, and therefore immediately think of those reforms that have always been on the agenda such as PA, Justice, Labour, industrial and infrastructural policy, necessary to ensure the fastest possible restart of the economy.
To link emergency and reforms Europe offers a tool that Italy could use to advantage. As former IMF chief economist Olivier Blanchard argues, since Italy has so far done everything right in the face of aggression from an external and unpredictable agent, it could resort to the ESM's "precautionary" credit line which is granted to countries which, while not complying with the Maastricht parameters, are subjected to external shocks and are committed to providing support to their economy in the right manner and in a timely manner, as indeed our country is already doing. These are thirty-year lines of credit at very low rates which in no way constitute humiliation or discredit for our country or the government that should access them.
Not only that, but the agreement with the ESM would make it possible to benefit from the unlimited credit lines granted by the ECB to countries that have not in any case lost access to the market. With this ammunition in reserve, it would be possible to obtain from investors a substantial lowering of the spread which today risks nullifying a significant part of the credits we need. And it is not clear why Fubini instead sees in this move the antechamber of the victory of sovereignty.
Of course, much will depend on the outcome of the operation. If the resources are actually used well and if the government's courage together with a healthy consideration of the national interest were to allow those reforms capable of reducing rents, waste and administrative confusion, then, as happened in the postwar period with the Marshall Plan, this European support could be the decisive weapon to defeat the return of nationalisms.
It is part of the national whining to see conspiracies everywhere. Germany did not inspire Lagarde's unfortunate statement, as in hindsight the measures adopted by the ECB are very important and such, if well understood, as to reassure the markets. As for the management of the health crisis, each country has so far done as it believed, including Italy. It doesn't seem to me that Germany has done it differently from the others. It is certainly right to aspire to further progress in European integration. But it is ridiculous to think that progress can come from those who criticize the current inadequacy of Europe after having prevented any further transfer of sovereignty by individual states.
