He may also be a young caudillo, a rude talent and anything else that can be said badly about him (the writer has never lacked for anything in exercising the right to criticize the prime minister), but this time too – on the affaire- pensions – Matteo Renzi has shown that he has an edge over his rivals and opponents, who, even after the announcement of the decree law, continue to bark at the moon, as if it were not only possible, but also reasonable to reimburse all pensioners (beneficiaries of benefits in the past exceeding three times the amount of the minimum) the cut of the automatic equalization in 2012 and 2013 with the consequent dragging also in the following years. We may be a country of old people (destined to be even more so), but it is not written anywhere that the rights of pensioners (like the prerogatives of the pigs of the "Animal Farm") are more sacrosanct than those of the others citizens.
It should not be forgotten that a ''little treasure'' of over 2 billion, initially intended for social inclusion and the fight against poverty, will be diverted, with the decree announced by the Government (it is good to wait for the text), for the benefit of some million pensioners who are certainly not poor. And let it not be said that, in a period of crisis, social security rights are the only ones that cannot be questioned in the slightest. Moreover, sentence n.70/2015 was careful not to declare the illegitimacy of any measure of tampering with the automatic equalisation.
If he had done so, the Consulta would have denied his own jurisprudence. Instead, in the motivations of sentence n.70, the Court recalled that it had rejected the appeal against the intervention made by the Prodi Government, in the 2008 Finance Law, with which the revaluation allowance had been cut for one year on pensions exceeding eight times the amount of the minimum. An operation that weighed on those pensioners for 1,4 billion (never returned) and which helped to finance the questionable overcoming of the so-called grand staircase referred to in the Maroni reform (law n.243/2003).
In the case of paragraph 25 of article 24 of the Salva Italia decree, the sanction of unconstitutionality concerned the level of the safeguarded pensions, considered by the "judges of the laws" to be too low. In essence, according to the Court, for the sacrifice required of pensioners to be considered reasonable and proportional, it would have been necessary to protect a greater number of them by moving the exemption cursor higher. The Government, therefore, acted in the only possible way, reimbursing – one-off – only a part of the pensioners. And it did so in accordance with the Court's disposition.
It would have been paradoxical, however, that a sentence of the Consulta (aimed at protecting medium-low pensions unjustly affected - in the opinion of the judges - in their purchasing power by the equalization measures) had also resulted in a benefit in favor of medium-high and high checks, on which, still in the opinion of the Court itself, it is legitimate to intervene. This is what would have happened if the Government had opted for a full refund. It could be said that getting away with a "one-off" disbursement – even if it is fractionated with respect to the amount of the checks – is a casual way of proceeding which will give rise to several appeals.
We are, however, ready to bet that, if the provision were to reach the examination of the Consulta in some time, it could only recognize its legitimacy precisely on the basis of the reasons for sentence n.70/2015. It should also be emphasized that the executive now wanted to take an uncomfortable decision. It may be due to Minister Padoan who persuaded Renzi not to beat around the bush; or the insistence of Brussels could be served. However, the prime minister, in the end, decided to go to the elections in two weeks' time, submitting himself to the judgment of the voters also for how he peeled the "poisoned apple" received as a gift from the Court. Those charlatans of his opponents think they can score full marks with the ramshackle claim of giving "everything to everyone".
They will realize to their cost that Italians are more mature than those who claim to represent them. Opposition forces, bizarre and plebeian, such as those occupying the benches of Parliament, cannot be asked to be responsible and to recognize that the solution adopted by the Government regarding the application of the sentence n.70/2015 of the Consulta was the only realistic and therefore possible. But at least they should be consistent with themselves. Let's postpone, for the sake of country, the case of Forza Italia.
It 's true that the PDL in the past legislature voted - obtorto collo - the Fornero reform, but this party (even in the current legislature) has shown that it has a short memory. And to make sensational u-turns with a record-breaking bronze face. Furthermore, the Azzurri are the only ones who can boast some title to represent (and defend) the classes excluded from the enlargement of the perimeter of protection (with relative one-off reimbursement) which the decree law should provide for.
But the other parties? Real sideshow acrobats. They have become – with the slogan of “giving everything back to everyone” – the champions of medium-high, high, golden pensions. Yet not a day goes by without the Fdl-An proposing to impose a ceiling on checks, while the M5s assumes, in its bill, the cut of the so-called golden pensions among the items that should provide financial coverage for the basic income. As for the League and the SEL, they certainly don't miss anything if there is demagoguery to do with pensions.
