(by Marco Zacchera) I suggest prudence in commenting on the outcome of the European weekend which - according to most commentators - “saved” Italy by covering it with aid.
Conte was neither the savior in the homeland nor a braggart: he tried to carry out his task with tenacity, but the results will only be seen concretely in months and, in the meantime, the government launches yet another budget extra deficit ..
Europe, to begin with, does not "give" anything to anyone: it does not have an open wallet for the most needy, but returns to the member countries what the same countries (and their savers) pay into the common fund so first of all we need to understand what Italy pays (and will pay) in the overall transfer to find out if the balance will actually be active or not.
It must be said that to date - also due to our chronic inability to manage European aid well - the Italian money paid in Brussels is much more than the money that goes back and that to find the 750 billion "Covid" aid they have many other lots were closed or reduced, some of which were specifically addressed to our country.
In fact, it is enough to change individual balance sheet items to enlarge the coverage on one side and implicitly close it on the other.
While waiting for the "real" balances, we should begin to ask ourselves why many "frugal" countries (which just aren't) were so angry with Italy and here the answer is simple: simply because we never respect our commitments , always thinking of being the smartest of all.
How can those smart Dutchmen believe in our good intentions if to enter the single currency we had declared and guaranteed to them that we would have committed to reducing our public deficit to 60% of GDP when instead already before Covid we were well over 130% ? It is logical that Europe wants to be vigilant and I think it is very good to ask for controls given past experiences, moreover the controls would be useful to us too ...
The problem, in fact, is that once again in exchange for the funds, Italy has promised a series of radical reforms that nobody actually wants to carry out (or is capable of doing) fearing electoral repercussions. At the same time, the struggle has already begun within the government to determine who will be part of the small group of ministers who will manage European funds.
Of course, in fact, "reforms" are needed, but they are not without sacrifices.
It is always said that a politician really becomes a statesman if he thinks of future generations, but how can an Italian politician ever do it if he always risks collapsing in the ambushes of his friends even before his opponents?
I believe that Conte has armored the chair until the end of the term, however risking the fall if it will not satisfy the voracious majority partners but - having to satisfy everyone at the end - here is that the "structural" reforms risk running aground on the street as always.
On this point - let's face it - the opposition is also weak, which does not seem able to prepare shared, serious, achievable and concrete points.
It is certainly easier to criticize, but a possibly alternative Italy-project is needed to be well presented to the voters.
And to think that instead there is a novelty on the Italian political landscape and it is the new presidency of Confindustria that seems much more lively in the controversy with the government and that every day documents without frills necessary choices: why not listen carefully to these suggestions, a part of the which seem to me particularly centered and with practical solution ideas