Recovery Plan, how to manage it? While Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte has staked everything on a controversial "control room" (later withdrawn in the face of Matteo Renzi's outcry), proposals continue to arrive from the business and academic world. Assonime, the association of Italian joint-stock companies, and the La Malfa Foundation, who had already presented their respective documents on the subject, met again in a virtual meeting in which other personalities of the caliber of Romano Prodi, Sabino Cassese, Franco Bassanini, Carlo Cottarelli, Marcello Messori and others gave their contributions. The two proposals have been recalled and agree on the need for ad hoc governance, in order not to waste an historic opportunity: Europe is recognizing Italy with a ceiling of subsidies and loans which overall exceeds 200 billion euros. Provided, however, that the objectives for which this money is disbursed are respected and that the necessary reforms are implemented.
“There are two paths to governance – began Giorgio La Malfa -. Involve a network of national, territorial and local public bodies and then seek a synthesis, as the Government would like to do, or create extraordinary structures that coordinate the interventions relating to the Next Generation EU and ensure their implementation. And this is what we propose: extraordinary situations must be followed by extraordinary responses”. La Malfa then compared the current situation to that of the Marshall Plan after the war: “The EU recognizes us a gigantic figure, higher than the Marshall Plan in proportion to GDP. The government made a serious mistake at the beginning of August: sent a letter to central and peripheral administrations asking to present projects. But too many arrived and not all of them were of high quality, and in doing so the project lost its unity".
Even at the time of the Marshall Plan, the United States criticized Italy for its slow use of resources. “Already at the time – said La Malfa – the accusation was that the Italian public administrations didn't work. Even the World Bank told us that a special body had to be set up e so did the president De Gasperi creating the Cassa del Mezzogiorno, which was a historically positive moment in the post-war recovery. There is this precedent but also that of the Morandi Bridge, to look at. And then there is a need for control and supervision of this governance: we propose a parliamentary commission, appointed by a qualified majority, because it is very important to involve the opposition in controlling this project as well".
Stefano Micossi, general manager of Assonime, then recalled the association's proposal: “There is a political level, where the general allocation of resources is decided, by objectives, after an intense discussion with the social partners. And then there is the technical-management level, for the selection and implementation of projects, which as far as we are concerned must be entrusted to a Minister for the Recovery Plan. A minister without portfolio but who has all the necessary powers and that he sits on the CDM”. The substantial difference with the La Malfa proposal lies in the fact of not creating new special structures, but using the existing structures (the ministries, with the sole appointment of the super minister who supervises everything) and at the limit resorting to external consultants.
“The real problem – Franco Bassanini then intervened – is the inability of some governments to understand change of scenery and paradigm. The public debt problem is today a long-term sustainability problem which is resolved in the denominator of the debt to GDP ratio, ie in the GDP. Recovery tends to finance structural reforms and investments to make a country's economic growth potential and well-being and social cohesion lasting. One of the real limitations of the reforms made in recent decades was the unavailability of the necessary resources: today, however, these resources exist, but reforms must be made. And at the moment the indications are too general. We just say: 'They have to be done'.”
“Here there are no resources to distribute but projects to implement and goals to achieve: this is it the reasoning of the 62 points presented by Matteo Renzi“, Sabino Cassese said, adding: “To act quickly, we need to get rid of the Court of Auditors and the Anac, preparing a final document. The objectives are not indicated by the European Union, we must indicate the objectives”. Finally, the considerations of former premier Romano Prodi: “I'm a retired professor, so I no longer give report cards – began Prodi -. It was evident that what was unleashed would be unleashed. The point is the reforms, as my colleagues have said: some shocking decisions are needed, above all if we make the comparison with the post-war period, which means absolutely changing the system. We also need the suspension of some procedures and some guarantees, limited to the implementation of the Recovery of course ".
“I have always said, provocatively, that by suspending the Tar, we would immediately grow by 5%. Let me give you an example: the Adriatic railway would cost us 60 billion. Is that more important or making Taranto the Italian Silicon Valley? Both would be measures in favor of the South, but they are political choices that the Government must make. However, this does not mean suspending democracy: the Government will absolutely have to deal with Parliament, the Regions, the social partners, but assume political responsibility. A coordination function could be assumed by the Cipe: it was already in my plan to strengthen it, to make it a French-style entity. But the technical function is one thing, the cost-benefit analysis another, the objectives to be achieved remain a political choice”, said Prodi. “We need to make two or three exemplary reforms, made with an ax and not with a file”.
