"What is being discussed is not a federalist reform, but the start of a process that would lead to the dissolution of Italy: and it is not so much and only a question of a North-South rift, because it is doubtful that the process of differentiated autonomy we are talking about can bring effective benefits in the short and above all in the medium term, to all citizens, including those of rich regions .”
Gianfranco Viesti, a well-known economist who teaches at the University of Bari, has for some time been the promoter together with some colleagues of a real campaign to explain to citizens, and to politicians themselves, the true meaning and implications of the project of differentiated autonomy it has been under discussion for several months and which for now seems stuck on the shoals of the differences between the two government partners.
It all stems from the unfortunate reform of Title V of the Constitution passed in 2001 by the centre-left government with the aim of removing the appeal of the local appeal of the League which at the time only interested the North. But the intent of the reformers of article 116 of the Constitution was then to list a certain number of subjects that the Regions could have asked for (but one or two were thought of) due to particular territorial needs different from those of other Regions. No one thought about the possibility that one or more Regions would ask to have all the subjects listed in the article.
Instead for political reasons, after having deluded the wealthy citizens of the North that it was right to keep the money that was earned in one's own territory, the Veneto, followed by Lombardia and unfortunately fromEmilia Romagna have requested the transfer from the state of a large number of subjects: ranging from school to infrastructure, energy, major works, cultural heritage, work.
Consider that the Lombardy region has requested the transfer of 131 new legislative and administrative functions. Without however providing adequate demonstration of the greater efficiency of regional management, compared to the central one. And after all, even on health care, the flagship of the Lombard management, it is neglected to consider that the former president Formigoni is serving a sentence of 5 years in prison precisely for a scandal concerning health care costs.
In short, if the legislation passed, which is being discussed in great secrecy between the Government and the Regions total chaos would be created, the administrative and perhaps constitutional dispute between the center and the periphery would increase, the room for maneuver of the central government would be reduced to a flicker and ultimately the crumbling of the country would begin.
“In countries where there is a strong and well-ordered federalism there is – affirms Professor Viesti – a solid and authoritative central power with precise attributions. It would therefore be necessary in Italy to start a reform process which on the one hand has the capacity to strengthen the government of Rome and on the other to start a general change of local autonomy putting everyone on the same level. In this context, the attributions of the Regions with special status as with the current system you create some inequalities between neighboring territories. It is obvious that Veneto suffers from the overwhelming power of Trentino - Alto Adige and Friuli and therefore tries to imitate them in all respects. But this it only shifts the boundary of discrimination further downstream and when all the regions have requested and obtained similar powers to those of the Veneto there would be either a strong increase in public spending with probable bankruptcy of the State, or imbalances between individual citizens would accentuate in a way that is certainly anti-constitutional.
In other words, we risk a disbandment of Italy similar to the one that occurred in Spain where the differentiated autonomy granted to the Basque country led the Catalans to make similar requests that the central government had to stop with very energetic police and judicial measures. Furthermore, such a large autonomy granted to the Regions it would greatly increase the volume of money intermediated by the local political class by destroying what little remains of the national parties who had the ability to mediate localist thrusts internally by favoring a political synthesis advantageous for the general interest, as happened at least for the first twenty years after the Second World War. They would left even more at the mercy of the local boyars that they would have all the levers to manage consensus. And even the national union confederations would see their power to standardize working conditions throughout the country shattered.
If we talk about financial imbalances, it seems to me that the Minister of the Treasury has clearly stated that regionalism can only be done on condition that it does not lead to increases in public spending.
“This is true – says Viesti – and yet after Gentiloni had accepted the principle that the Regions with higher incomes could count on greater resources than those currently spent by the State, with the current Government an attempt was made to backtrack. And yet from the draft agreements circulated so far, it is clear that with complicated mechanisms whose effects on spending are largely indeterminate, an attempt is made to envisage a gradual increase in the resources available to the Regions with the highest tax revenues, thus circumventing Tria's prescription regarding the non-increase of overall expenditure. The transition from historical expenditure to standard needs is a very complex and delicate operation that risks creating new imbalances not only between North and South but also within the richest regions themselves".
In short, it is a matter of understanding the effects of certain measures. On the Health, for example the current distribution of the National Fund on the basis of the population and its aging does not give rise to an equitable subdivision of the funds as it would be appropriate to also take into consideration other parameters connected to the social and health characteristics of the population which in some areas suffers of diseases that are unknown in others.
“But let's take the case of infrastructure and industrial policy. Liguria, for example, claims full responsibility for its ports, airport and road network. Have the industrialists of the North evaluated what it might mean to go and negotiate tariffs with the region to have their goods pass through Genoa? All then claim responsibility for the disbursement of the funds that the State currently allocates to industrial policy. But how could regional industrial policies not be linked to the centre? How could each Region set up its own research centers or encourage some companies in competition with those of the neighboring Region? There is a risk of increasing the waste of public money or to create inequalities such as those that Italian industrialists complain exist vis-à-vis Slovakia or Romania”.
Italy as a country is already too small to be able to compete in the world. And in fact we have to stay in Europe and stay there in a convinced and authoritative way. Smaller regional economies would be exposed to attacks from international competitors. The same concept of fiscal surplus on which unscrupulous politicians have built their fortunes by promising to distribute to the citizens of rich regions what is now given to those who do not produce and live on subsidies, is a bit of a hoax. Where do companies based in the North with factories throughout Italy produce the income for the taxes they pay in their region?
Certainly there are historical facts that mark structural differences between various parts of the country. But these are not overcome by trying to grab a larger slice of the pie, but by trying, with appropriate policies, to make this pie grow for everyone.
And these policies also pass through an institutional reorganization. The regions, almost fifty years after their establishment, they need extraordinary maintenance. In the first place we need to understand how they have worked so far and whether there hasn't been a misunderstood interpretation of autonomy which has led to a multiplication of bureaucracy, to a fragmentation of services (from health to transport) which does not make much sense for the citizen.
There has generally been an increase in expenses, too often not justified by the efficiency and development of the area. This kind of autonomy differentiated which is discussed not only it does not remedy the obvious dysfunctions of the current Regions, but on the contrary accentuates the overall inefficiencies of the system until you get close to the disintegration of our already fragile national state.
