He will also be a young man leader, a talented rude and anything else that can be said badly about him (the writer has never lacked for anything in exercising the right to criticize the premier), but this time too – on the pensions affair – Matteo Renzi has shown that he has a gear more than its rivals and opponents, who, even after the announcement of the law decree, continue to bark at the moon, as if it were not only possible, but also reasonable to reimburse all pensioners (owners of benefits at the time higher than 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 will also be one Country of the elderly (destined to be even more so), but it is not written anywhere that the rights of pensioners (like the prerogatives of the pigs on Animal Farm) are more sacrosanct than those of other citizens.
It is good not to forget 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), to the benefit of a few 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 to be returned) and which helped to finance the questionable overcoming of the so-called staircase pursuant to 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 it concerned the level of 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 will be possible to say that get away with a "one off" disbursement – even if fractionated with respect to the amount of the checks – it 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 role played by Minister Poletti is not known. However, the premier / little boy, in the end, decided to go to the elections in two weeks, subjecting 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.
