Publishing, industry, the Mezzogiorno but also Renzi, Emiliano and Boccia's new Confindustria: there are many visual angles from which Alessandro Laterza, at the helm with his cousin Giuseppe of the Bari publishing house and for four years vice president of Confindustria with responsibility for the Mezzogiorno and for Regional Policies, look to today's Italy. And that's what he talks about in the weekend interview he gave to FIRSTonline
Publishing, industry and Confindustria, the Mezzogiorno between Renzi and Emiliano: Dr. Laterza, there are many points of your observation of today's and tomorrow's Italy, but what is your assessment of the state of the country? The problems of Italy and the South are known but can they only fuel pessimism and concern or finally – on an economic and civil level – are there any signs of recovery?
I would say yes, there are some positive signs. To be less generic, a few weeks ago Confindustria, together with Cerved - the largest Information Provider in Italy and one of the main rating agencies in Europe - presented the "Second PMI Report 2016" from which it emerges that, despite the permanence of some weaknesses, among which the difficulties in accessing credit stand out above all, in the south of the country the symptoms of recovery are evident. In a few days we will also publish a report dedicated to central and northern Italy in which tangible improvements are recorded, characterized by an even stronger acceleration than that seen in the South.
Although the data remain lower than those existing in the pre-crisis period, the positive thrust is there. At this point it is therefore necessary to move forward and try to understand whether the recovery can be consolidated. The answer will depend both on external factors that cannot be directly controlled, such as the international situation. But also from internal factors, namely an increase in public and private investment. From the first point of view, capital expenditure, which has been deficient for many years now, will be fundamental. In the second case, however, it will be necessary to make use of the super-depreciation provided for by the 2016 Stability Law to which, for Southern Italy, there is also a specific tax credit operating until 31 December 2019 for a total value of 2,4 billion euros .
Visiting the Riace Bronzes museum in Reggio Calabria, Prime Minister Renzi said in recent days that "it is no use complaining about lost opportunities" and launched his campaign to promote local and regional agreements within the framework of a great Pact for the South: could it be a road capable of bearing fruit in the Mezzogiorno?
The Masterplan announced this summer by the Government, of which the Pacts for the South are the direct consequence, must be seen for what it is: a mechanism aimed at accelerating the expenditure of funds currently available for the South, from the Development and Cohesion Fund, to national co-financing funds up to the substantial European structural funds envisaged for the 2014-2020 cycle. It is a useful tool because it accelerates capital expenditure, but it is not the so-called Marshall plan for the South, it does not add additional resources to those envisaged, but manages those currently available for the area.
At this juncture, it is also necessary to remember that in the last decade both current expenditure and capital expenditure, expressed in per capita terms, in the South have been considerably lower than in the Centre-North. Four-five thousand euros less per year for each citizen of the South. A sensational difference explained by pension expenditure, but in no way reduced by the presence of European structural funds and those created ad hoc for the South. The Masterplan is an important tool, but the citizens must not have the illusion that there is a privileged treatment of the South, because in fact there is only in terms of partial compensation for the reduced tax revenues of the less wealthy part of the country.
The most refined southerners have been saying for some time that there is not just one South but there are many different ones and, after all, its region (Puglia) is the example of a land that develops in a patchwork pattern: this means that Are different territorial policies needed for the South today but with a common denominator made up of tangible and intangible infrastructures, the fight against crime and also the tax authorities?
Surely there are elements of differentiation that lead to look at the territory from different points of view, making distinctions at local and regional level. Taking into account what has just been said, however, it is crucial to be able to find a way to combine the national vision, which is indispensable, with the different local peculiarities. The absence of this conjugation is the reason why there have been frictions between the central government and territories such as Puglia and Naples. To a certain extent, these are phenomena of political competition, which have nothing to do with the merits of the question. But also of different visions regarding the management of the future at local and regional level.
In my opinion, the right way would be that of collaboration. The fact that national programs are envisaged in which priorities of general interest prevail is normal, but I cannot fail to take into consideration that these aspects must be combined with decisions of a local nature. It is a balance game that must be built to continue the road to recovery. However, avoiding blocks and obstacles that affect the skin of citizens and businesses.
Impossible not to ask you at this point about the sparks between Renzi and Emiliano: do you think it is a problem of personal temperament or do two opposing political philosophies collide (reformism against neo-populism)?
I fear that looking for valid reasons and explanations in this field is in vain. These are episodes concerning competitions and debates which unfortunately become more acute in the vacuum of politics with a capital letter. There hasn't been a serious discussion on the future of energy supply, nor on decarbonisation as a development opportunity, but a squabble over a rather evanescent referendum appointment. When the different points of view are not supported by a level political debate, it is normal that only the dimension of the personal opposition emerges.
In my view, the discussion of the so-called drilling referendum has taken on a surreal quality, given that the concerns that fueled the origins of the referendum consultation were resolved before April 17th. It was a debate centered on nothing and therefore only political competition emerged.
Confindustria has a new designated president who comes from the South like Vincenzo Boccia and there are those who, in electing him, advised him to discontinue, especially in union relations, to make Confindustria return to the fore on the economic, political and social scene: do you think he will?
In my opinion, the debate on Confindustria has also taken on strange tones. Giorgio Squinzi has repeatedly stated that there are two areas on which he does not feel satisfied with the measures implemented during his years at the top of the Confederation: the first concerns the results of Il Sole 24 Ore, of which he recently assumed the presidency ; the second concerns bargaining. From this point of view, therefore, there is no discontinuity to inaugurate, but it is rather necessary to support a line that redefines the balance between wages and productivity through the enhancement of second-level bargaining.
This was the line pursued by Squinzi and this will be the path followed by Boccia, a path that will respond to an essential change for the competitive structure of the Italian system. There will be a test by fire - both on the employers' and trade union fronts - in the transition from disputes over the top systems to the operational kitchen of category contracts. There we will measure the will of all parties - not just the Presidency of Confindustria - to carry forward a project that goes in favor of business and employment.
The Government does not like concertation with social representatives but has collected many requests from companies (from the Job Act to the first signs of a reduction in contributions and IRAP): what is your overall opinion on Renzi's reform policy?
There have been some steps forward and results have been obtained, from the de-contribution on new hires to the deduction of labor costs from IRAP, to the insistence on sterilizing investment spending from the constraints of the European stability pact. The continuation of the course, already set by the Letta government, on the acceleration of payments by the Public Administration and on the moratorium on mortgages was also positive. As regards the Jobs Act, the effects of the reform will be seen over time, but there is no doubt that there will be improvements.
However, now we need to complete the reform program, proceeding above all with local and national administrative simplification and with the acceleration of the times of Justice, two very important factors to give greater efficiency to businesses and develop our country's ability to attract investments.
In the context of the transition that the country is going through to get out not only of the recession but also of the crisis, how does the publishing industry and the book industry in particular fit in Italy today? Is the consolidation, which produced the integration between Mondadori and Rizzoli Libri, an inevitable path and will it also have repercussions on a publishing house like Laterza?
To answer your question, it must first be underlined that the Mondadori – Rizzoli transaction was born simply from RCS's need to resolve a cash and debt problem. There is, in this, no extraordinary strategy linked to new evolutionary scenarios. However, the integration will lead to a strong modification of the market framework, causing problems for all the players in the supply chain, starting from the publishers up to the distribution terminals, whether they are independent or chains.
Why? We could retrace the investigation by the Antitrust which unfortunately had a very modest result, namely the Authority's injunction to sell the Bompiani publishing house and the stake in Marsilio.
The operation allowed the two groups to merge obtaining a controlling position equal to about 30% of the market, a reality never seen anywhere in the industrial world. It is not a problem of principle, but when Bur and Oscar Mondadori control 60% of the pocket market, it is clear what the problem is. Although there is no connotation of voluntariness, competition is automatically destroyed, because whatever price or commercial condition this aggregation wishes to establish in the future, that will be the parameter which the entire Italian market will be forced to comply with. No one will have the possibility to compete anymore and that component of competition which by definition represents the regulating factor of the market will disappear.
The effects of this aggregation will be very heavy. I see a difficult scenario that is grafted onto a reality, that of book publishing, which, while not arousing the same concerns as newspapers, is still today below the levels of 2010. In 2015, for the first time after five years, the decline seems to have finally stopped. Concentration will not help the recovery and could ultimately lead to a supply shortage.
The reduction in income suffered by Italians in recent years or the challenge of the Internet and new technologies weighs more on the book industry, and how does Laterza intend to respond?
As regards the components that have had the greatest impact on the book publishing crisis, the engine of the problems was undoubtedly the reduction in the spending power of Italians.
This factor has been intertwined with the evolution of digital publishing which has made good progress over the last few years, but which still represents a marginal share of the market today.
At this juncture, I cannot fail to underline the market conditioning deriving from the advance of Amazon and all the intermediaries that sell eBooks and books on paper. This component has greatly affected the balance of the distribution chain, creating an imbalance that has not yet been absorbed.
Speaking instead of technological evolution, and in this field I am expressing a purely personal opinion, more than the impact of the internet that exists and has been on books, but to a lesser extent than what happened in journalism, the advent of digital terrestrial and satellite.
Multi-channel TV has created an offer that has captured the attention of citizens and, as I often observe, gives good quality broadcasts to the public. Between a Rai Storia program, for example, and reading a history book, many choose the former. In functional terms they are fungible cultural consumption.
To date, factors of structural and economic change can be glimpsed. The only way to respond is to preside over the traditional sectors, and I also include the eBook among them, trying to be present with commitment both on paper and digitally. It is also necessary to introduce elements of differentiation. In our case, we take care of the promotion of Festivals, such as that of the Economy of Trento, and cycles of lessons. Through these activities we intend to enhance the specific competence of the Publisher which is that of selecting and organizing content. Furthermore, these opportunities also become opportunities to produce new initiatives. From them a book, a television broadcast or a new digital format can be born.
