The prime minister Silvio Berlusconi, in a letter to the Courier (31 January), has proposed a bipartisan grand plan for growth. " Tuesday, February 8, the Council of Ministers should adopt the plan.
This time, we can not complain about the slowness of Italian politics! In eight days we saw a head of government - as struck on the road to Damascus - is converted to an economic policy very different from the one followed so far, opposition to that, received an unexpected invitation to cooperate, reject it immediately, to a government, without experiencing other attempts, rushes to decide. Decisionism copy? No, rather the sum of a reckless move and not a counter-meditated.
Berlusconi's move is unconventional: not explained why the new line has been embraced now and not in 1994, 2001 or 2008, at the beginning of his three terms, it seems aimed mainly to show a prime minister again concentrate on the real problems of the country and the opposition to blame the responsibility of poor growth and widespread youth unemployment.
The counter-oppositions, in particular the Secretary of the Democratic Party, Pier Luigi Bersani, and that is rebuffed, it is perfectly understandable from a psychological and dignity. But do not go to 'see', not to study the terms of a possible collaboration in the best interests of the country - and made subject to programmatic precise, strong control systems and, above all, an explicit recognition of the shortcomings of Berlusconi economic policy followed so far by his government-is likely to facilitate the discharge of responsibilities.
But what was the proposal of the Prime Minister? "Bring the growth over the three-four per cent in five years," giving "the greatest horse to whip the economy history Italian memories ia ',' economy finally free." The "great plan "would have had the" core constitutional reform of Article 41, which was announced by Minister Tremonti months (in addition to measures of market placement of assets and tax relief for businesses and young people).
is a pity that this plan will see the light so late and with a low credibility. I am not referring to Berlusconi's personal credibility at this stage complex for him, but the specific credibility of his plan. It is inevitable to ask for such reasons as the previous governments and then in the first two and a half years of the current government which he has not fully committed to the liberalization, promoting competition and combating revenue. Above all, this was expected of him - a "disciplined and rigorous liberal" - as was confirmed before the Houses in 1994.
Neither were pressing missed calls, even from these columns, to direct its political leadership of the government - in method and in substance - in the sense which seems to join now, suddenly and without explaining why only now. In the method, in two respects. First, the availability of a bipartisan commitment to reform in order to overcome the resistance corporate ('bipartisan commitment before the election, "Corriere January 3, 2006,' Berlusconi and reform ', 28 January 2007;" bipartisan agenda " February 3, 2008).
This willingness, always denied by the right and left whoever was in government, is now manifested by Berlusconi. Unfortunately, this comes at a time of particular tension between the parties, to which the Prime Minister has certainly not failed to contribute (even if the letter to the Courier calls "a country more stable, less quarrelsome, confident and even self-love and own future. ")
Second, taking a more visible leadership responsibilities in the economic and social policy, without prejudice to the essential functions of the Minister of Economy and Finance. Without coordination under the aegis of the President of Council, it is argued here ("The future of Italy and political leadership," July 25, 2010), it is difficult for policy development receives attention equal to that, which is essential, given the budgetary discipline. With the letter to Corriere - but again, why only now? - Berlusconi appears to become conscious.
the merits, only now there seems to be the realization that growth in Italy is not satisfactory, that this is related to shortcomings in competitiveness and requires structural reforms, including liberalization different (but also, we hope that will not be forgotten, the strengthening independent authority to oversee the market). Until now, as it was found ("The silence on growth," September 4, 2010), the emphasis was not placed on the low growth, partly because it tended to spread a vision of a little 'too' soothing ').
Overall, the above is achieved by a sound economic policy in keeping the public finances but marred by errors in the overall strategy ("How much time we lost," October 31, 2010).
There can not be, apparently, the desired bipartisan approach. However, we hope that the Council of Ministers on Tuesday, when it launched the "great plan for growth," privileges the practical aspects and operational measures, show clearly how they would impact on competitiveness, growth and employment.
is also desirable that the plan does not offend the intelligence of Italians. For example, if you intend to propose amendments to Article. 41 of the Constitution, it matters because it is deemed appropriate, possibly in the context of other changes. But it does not present this as a necessary condition, or nearly so, to introduce liberalization. Other governments have introduced various liberalization despite the currency of that article. Moreover, the present government has denounced the art. 41 as the only obstacle to the liberalization last year, although the Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance has had an opportunity to compete with this issue since 1994.
For consistency, we should also expect that the plan will be presented Tuesday, the government announced that it intends to withdraw its proposal, already approved by the Senate, reintroduction of minimum fees for lawyers. (Would not it be more constructive if the opposition, instead of immediately rejecting the bipartisan dialogue, had indicated this withdrawal as one of the preconditions for a bipartisan working?).
If you want to be serious about liberalization, we also revisit the Constitution, but before you visit Athens. On 21 January, the Papandreou government adopted a reform of what the Greeks call properly "closed professions" and we euphemistically the "liberal professions". The reform is the for all occupations, the minimum rates, the number closed, and the principle of territorial restrictions to compete with advertising. It is left to the professional the opportunity to demonstrate, but having upon himself the burden of proof, that either of these restrictions are necessary to protect public interests, such as integrity in the profession or Consumer Protection.
Mario Monti - Corriere della Sera - February 6, 2011
0 comments:
Post a Comment