Share

Parliament, between "hare" and "snail" laws

During the last legislature, 387 laws were approved, 297 of which were produced by the two governments and just 90 by Parliament - Some measures received the green light in less than a week, while others remained in the pipeline for the entire five years - The ranking of parliamentarians is also included in the Openpolis report "Camere Aperte".

Parliament, between "hare" and "snail" laws

During the legislature that is about to close, they were approved 387 laws, of which 297 produced by the two governments (first Berlusconi, then Monti) and just 90 by parliamentarians. The former had an average process of 130 days, the latter over 600. These are some of the data collected in the third edition of the "Camere Aperte" report, produced by the Openpolis association through a statistical analysis of parliamentary activities.

Beyond the averages, the study brings out a clear distinction between "read hare"and "read snail“. The distinction is naturally the interest shown by parliamentarians for the provision under analysis. Among the fastest "hares" there is the so-called save-list decree, approved in 2010 in just seven days (but then rejected by the Tar). The aim was to allow the readmission of the Pdl to the Lazio Regionals. The Salva Italia of the Monti government followed (16 days) and the Lodo Alfano (20 days, but then the Consulta declared the provision unconstitutional).

As for the "snails", as it was easy to predict, the sad primacy belongs to anti-corruption law: the bill (presented by Luigi Ligotti of the IDV) passed through almost the entire span of the legislature, passing through the hands of three Ministers of Justice. A total of 1.456 days passed between the proposal and the final go-ahead. Second and third step of the podium go respectively to usury law (1.357 days) and to that on recognition of natural children (1.259 days).

The report also includes the standings of MPs drawn up on the basis of various criteria: the productivity index (attendance in the classroom and at the votes, interventions during the legislative process of each provision), degree of rebellion (vote in contrast with the indication of the group), propensity to change group or even deployment, parliamentary seniority and more.

The most absent from the Senate is Giovanni Pistorio (Mpa), who missed 65,3% of the sessions, while the most present were Cristiano De Eccher (Pdl), with 99,9% of attendance, and Achille Totaro (Fratelli of Italy) with 99,8%. The number one in the Chamber was Remigio Ceroni (Pdl), present at 99,88% of the sessions, the most absent Antonio Gaglione (91,7%) and Niccolò Ghedini (81,2%).

comments