We are now one year after the decision that dissolved the Institute of Foreign Trade. For many months now, the newly formed Export Agency has been headed by a completely new President and Board of Directors, accredited expressions of public institutions as well as businesses. Nonetheless, a former General Manager, unanimously hired with a contract a few weeks before the dissolution of the Institute, fought to the sound of revenue stamps in defense of his reasons as well as his legitimate interests, demanding in addition to maintaining the emoluments and of the office also that of powers annulled by decree. To this day boasting consolidated legal reasons.
The study (offered apparently by Confindustria) of Mckinsey (the basis of the reform and relaunch) is struggling to become concrete also because, reading it, one does not go beyond the historical snapshot of the international presence of our country, devoid as it is of innovative and concrete operational solutions .
The ex ICE executives go around looking for signals or indications of a vast and crowded "control room" by three Ministries, by four business organizations and by Regions reluctant to cede powers and prerogatives. Even the legitimate and indispensable curiosity of the Parliamentary Commissions on the future of the Agency has taken the form of hearings without, to date, innovative refractions on the path of the same. The last one, in the Senate, resulted in a debacle of image and of project under the fire of skeptical, incredulous and above all disappointed parliamentarians by the first steps of a President dear to the Government of the professors. Senator Casoli (owner of the Elica) spoke for a few minutes to sink the boat of the new Agency, still in the pipeline. “Three to zero” a disconsolate former ICE executive commented in the corridor.
This is how things stand since we didn't want to choose the path of completing that process that wanted to link our productive and commercial expansion on the markets to the country's "political" diplomacy.
The integration accomplished with the Farnesina as the last step in the process desired by Marzano and Frattini dissolved into the void of the control rooms, in the fog of concerts between ministerial bureaucracies to end up in a mad mayonnaise between national and foreign chambers of commerce, , Embassies and Consulates.
Today all the reforming tension is based on the calls for tenders to choose from within the old staff (domestic and foreign) of the former ICE and the 300 or 400 officials of the Agency. Having removed the annoying method of merit and specializations, the career (passed off as a curriculum vitae), seniority and all that para-union armor that plasters merits and professionalism seems to triumph.
In the meantime, plans are being made to keep only the Milan and Rome offices open (a wise decision) but nothing is being done to close all the remaining regional offices. When it comes to closing those of Naples, Bari or Palermo we will see some good ones.
Abroad, operational miracles are expected from the Chambers of Commerce abroad; some professionally efficient (London, Frankfurt, Madrid), others above all war machines for electoral consensus or for the economic defense of native elites (Latin America or India).
In all this "static confusion" no clear project emerges. The Farnesina appears satisfied in its prerogatives of seeing the Embassies at the center of the system but without responsibility for initiative.
Does Confindustria really have nothing to add? Have Petrone's years and experiences in viale dell'Astronomia not left their mark? Squinzi who has direct and successful experience on foreign markets should give the machine a "speed up" without bothering to favor this or that official who sees his imminent retirement in via Liztz or the low-cost channel to bring some friendly company to the Fair or as a delegation . Better to create a centaur (half public, half private) than create a platypus.
