Earthquake: even the Chamber wants to better understand how and why Italy crumbles under earthquakes every time. And on the thrust of the recent earthquake, the Montecitorio Environment Commission will open a fact-finding investigation on anti-seismic prevention policies and on reconstruction models following seismic events. The question is on the agenda for next Thursday's session, 15 September. In this context, the hearing of the Minister of Infrastructure and Transport, Graziano Delrio, will take place.
Prevention and safety in the first place, but also problems of protection and economic protection for those who suddenly lose their homes and loved ones. And in this regard, how to deal with the risks deriving from natural disasters and with which tools? ANIA, the association of insurance companies, suggests some tools implemented by some of the countries most exposed to seismic risk: New Zealand, Japan, California, Turkey.
In New Zealand the insurance plan is characterized by a centralized organization in the hands of the State, which also deals with the management and payment of claims and by a compulsory natural catastrophe policy in the presence of fire coverage.
In Japan the program is based on policies sold by private companies which reinsure as a group through the JER co-insurance fund. The risks ceded to the JER are shared between the government, the fund itself and the insurance companies.
In California the insurance system is characterized by a fund managed by the state but entirely financed by private individuals through policy premiums. The purchase of policies, sold by insurance companies, is optional in combination with fire insurance.
Finally, the Turkey. Launched in 2000, after the 1999 Izmit earthquake, the Turkish program is characterized by a mandatory policy with a premium proportional to the risk (based on geographical location and type of construction).
