For now, for sure there is only one date: The 24 January 1007 big voters will start voting to choose the new President of the Republic. For the rest dominates the fog. “Repubblica” (January 4) asked Bruno Tabacci: “Do you think this election was managed?”. The Lombard undersecretary, who is preparing to exercise the mandate of "great elector" for the fifth time in his long career, replied: "Not at all". And, in fact, less than two weeks after the crucial appointment, the Houses and the parties have not gone beyond a few informal contact and more or less confidential meetings: an unusual and disconcerting situation, given that the largest parliamentary group (elected under the banner of "everything in the light of the sun" and which, by practice, would have the burden of taking charge of the first formal indications) finds it difficult to define a clear and unambiguous position.
Today, however, something could change. The Prime Minister has called a press conference for the afternoon. The announced object of the meeting is a more exhaustive illustration of the recent anti-Covid measures. However, it is possible that Mario Draghi will also be asked questions on the Quirinal theme and that some useful ideas will emerge from his words (or his silences) to shed some light. However, after the public statement made by the premier at the end of December to be “available to the institutions”, it is evident that the duty of an explicit assumption of responsibility invests above all the political forces.
Among these the Alloy announces of prefer Draghi to stay at Palazzo Chigi while on the Quirinale its leader marries, in words, the hypothesis of Silvio Berlusconi. Furthermore, Matteo Salvini does not place this name in a shortlist to be formally proposed to the other groups, as happened in the past to prevent the confrontation from dragging on for too long or resulting in a narrow election. Both prospects would be disastrous for today's Italy.
even the Democratic Party is approaching the deadline of the 24th amid internal tensions and uncertainties. His strategy will perhaps be more legible after Thursday the 13th, when the Management will meet. Enrico Letta extended the opening of the discussion for a long time; now he seems inclined to ask that the vote for the Quirinal binds itself to the renewed commitment, by the other partners, of the government agreement operating today.
It is not clear whether the Secretary of the Democratic Party misses a key point of the current scenario or if he ignores it for a calculation that would be mediocrely cunning. In fact, Letta cannot overlook that the Draghi government was born on the basis of a "national salvation" pact entered into by hostile and competing parties to support the health emergency and to ensure full implementation of the Pnrr. But this need still persists and, indeed, for the fight against Covid it has become even more pressing. Putting these issues at the top of the negotiations for the Quirinale therefore translates, consciously or not, into a push for Draghi to remain in Palazzo Chigi, therefore the opposite of the objective declared by Letta himself: to favor the transfer of the Premier to the highest hill.
It can also be observed that the request that the majority that supports the Executive coincide with the one that will elect the new Head of State, ie a guarantee institution, does not appear, under the constitutional profile, to be an appropriate claim. A government majority is always exposed, in parliamentary physiology, to the possibility of a crisis; the one that leads to electing the President of the Republic, on the other hand, has a different nature: the two alignments can also, in practice, coincide; but to imagine one as the prerequisite for the other would be a stretch.
If it is really believed – a completely plausible prospect – that it is appropriate for Draghi to succeed President Mattarella, it would be preferable to support this hypothesis with more solid and broader reasons. Perhaps taking into account that the Premier himself has declared that it would be replaceable without harm to the country. Whether you focus on Draghi or not, a road that would be useful to take, in the general interest, still seems to be the one of lay the foundations for a constitutional pact.
The country, after the hard trials endured in the last two years, shows more than ever three needs aimed at creating the conditions for Italy to count more in Europe: stability of Government action; representativeness of elected officials; greater functionality of Parliament which, with the next vote, will see the number of its members greatly reduced. The choices to achieve these objectives, which have been matured for some time, have so far been culpably neglected. Yet, they have precise names: constructive mistrust of the Executive; a Electoral law with which citizens matter most; a revision of the Parliamentary Regulations and of the structure of the Chambers that prevent negative repercussions of the now approved reduction.
If on these objectives it were possible to define a platform of understanding as broad as possible among the electors and to identify a personality who, given his profile, could be the ideal guarantor, perhaps the road towards 24 January would be less impervious without that there is prejudice for the future and free development of the political battle. The match at the Quirinale - which circumstances unfortunately force us to face under the blows of Omicron and in a torn, fatigued and anxious country - cannot be reduced to a match that creates a gap between winners and losers. Rather, it must help Italy at a dramatic moment in its history and dispel, as quickly as possible, any risk of chaos.
