venerdì 1 febbraio 2008

Domande retoriche

Come nel 2001, anzi no, un po' peggio...
The Economist, 31 gennaio 2008

Unsteady as she goes
Italy has enough problems already: does it really need Silvio Berlusconi once again?
ITALY is notorious for its perpetually changing governments. Between 1981 and 2007, it had 16 prime ministers, including some repeats, compared with Britain's four. Yet lately Italian politics had acquired a patina of stability. Under pressure from voters, its fissiparous parties had coalesced into recognisable blocks of right and left. The centre-right government of Silvio Berlusconi served a full five-year term; when the media tycoon was defeated at the polls by the centre-left in April 2006, the hope was that Romano Prodi would also see out his term. It was not to be.

The upheaval triggered two weeks ago, when a tiny centrist party quit Mr Prodi's coalition, unseated the prime minister when he lost a vote of confidence in the Senate. After consultations, the Italian president this week has asked Franco Marini, speaker of the Senate, to form a short-term interim government. But Mr Berlusconi, hungry for power, is baying for an election as soon as possible. His commanding lead in the opinion polls suggests he would win, and return to Palazzo Chigi just 20 months after he left it.

Everybody agrees that the last thing that Italy needs is another succession of fractious, short-lived governments. It could just about get away with them when growth was strong, and vibrant private enterprise, especially in the north, more than made up for a shoddy (and often corrupt) public sector and the sclerotic Mezzogiorno. More recently, though, Italy's economic prospects have worsened. It is the slowest-growing big economy in Europe; the south is barely moving forward at all. Spain has just overtaken Italy by the measure of GDP per head, say the statisticians. Italy's competitive sparkle has dimmed. And the OECD, a think-tank, finds that it has the most heavily regulated economy in the rich world.

The country, in short, desperately needs both stable government and painful economic reform. The question is how to get these things. In 2001 voters overwhelmingly backed Mr Berlusconi (rejecting this paper's view that his chequered business history made him unfit to lead Italy). But he squandered his opportunity, using up political capital to protect his media interests and fend off judicial cases against him, and dithering over economic reform. After a disastrous term, he left behind his own “poison pill”: a law to change Italy's electoral system back to one based largely on proportional representation. By the time Mr Prodi lost his confidence vote, no fewer than 39 political parties were represented in parliament.

The poison has thus done for Mr Prodi. Ironically, it is also hurting Mr Berlusconi, who finds it increasingly hard to control small parties in his coalition. Both sides agree that electoral reform is needed to strengthen big parties at the expense of little ones. Yet the smalls will resist, making it hard for any interim government to get a new electoral law passed. So the odds are that Italy is heading for a fresh election under the existing system. Mr Berlusconi seems likely to win — although Mr Prodi's successor as centre-left leader, Walter Veltroni, a popular mayor of Rome, may whittle down his lead.

In search of liberalismo
New election rules are needed if stable government is to return. But Italy's deeper problem is that so few of its political leaders are genuinely liberalising reformers. Mr Prodi's government cut public borrowing and improved tax collection, but proved too timid to take on the vested interests that always resist change. It left the public sector mostly unreformed. As the renewed Naples rubbish crisis confirms, it failed utterly to sort out the Mezzogiorno. A younger and more energetic Mr Veltroni might be bolder, but his reform credentials are untested and his grip on any centre-left coalition may prove no firmer than Mr Prodi's.

There is not a glimmer of hope that a returning Mr Berlusconi would prove a better bet than Mr Prodi. Judging by his record, he might be worse, starting by undoing the Prodi government's successful tax-collecting reforms. Mr Berlusconi has made clear that his first priority would again be to protect his own interests, by making it harder to use evidence from wiretapping in court cases. However successful he has been in business, he remains unfit for the job he covets. Poor Italy.

6 commenti:

Antonio Gurrado ha detto...

There is a Sicilian proverb that goes "obsession is worse than sickness". It is useful to cite this proverb because The Economist in London has pitied us again ("poor Italy") in its opinion, which it considers virtually inevitable, that the "unfit" leader Silvio Berlusconi will make a return to government. Aside from my issues with the journalistic style - namely that repetition is monotonous, something that a genius of invention as the editor of the weekly, John Micklethwait, should already understand - there is also the problem of substance. It can't be denied that in his five years in office, Berlusconi guaranteed more the stability (one of the two keys to the salvation of Italy, according to the Economist) than the reform (the second key), but perhaps an overviey of his 5 years government, a record in the entire history of the Republic, deserves to be treated slightly less dismissively and with a bit more fair play. The Economist neglects to mention the fact that the end of the Prodi years has been sealed not just with the crumbling of his alliance, but also and mainly with an action by the court system that is unparalleled in any modern democracy - the arrest of the wife of the Minister of Justice with no legal grounds to do so and wire tapping illegally broadcast on television to rival any theatrical performance, in order to achieve the character assassination of an entire little souther Italian political family. It is curious that a liberal-conservative and civil rights backing publication as The Economist would choose to ignore these ghastly details, which would make it seethe with rage if it was being played out in the area of London, where the Hutton Commission ousted the entire top menagement of the BBC for much less, under the pressure of the Prime Minister of Her Majesty, Tony Blair. If our colleagues at the London magazine could accept this as a fact, not an opinion, but a hard fact, perhaps they might not write that Berlusconi had spent his tenure in offince writing laws to defend himself from the attack of the magistrates, but rather, they might ask the reason why. And they might also have the energy and the intellectual capacity to see that the only true liberal reform of the Italian economy, that of the labour market, was made by the Berlusconi government, while his consultant and the author of the law, Marco Biagi, paid with his life, brutally murdered by the Red Brigades for having even suggested it. These are also monstrous details that an esteemend and respected publication should consider before repeating the worn out tale of the unfitness of an unusual political figure to stand, probably winning his position because of a popular vote, in the most unusual political and civil scene on the planet.

(Il Foglio quotidiano, anno XIII n.27, 1 febbraio 2008, p.3)

G.

Lisa ha detto...

Mamma mia, hanno una coda di paglia, quelli del Foglio... Cos'è, un complesso di inferiorità?
(cmq, invece di elaborare piccate risposte all'indirizzo dell'Economist, continuare a prendersela con i magistrati sempre e comunque e ben oltre l'evidenza, perché non pensano piuttosto a chi dovrà pagare il risarcimento al signor Francesco Di Stefano - i contribuenti italiani?!? Gasparri?!? -, alla depenalizzazione del falso in bilancio, al prezzo pagato dal paese per far durare la precedente legislatura ben cinque anni, e al fatto che in uno stato serio - ad esempio i tanto amati e lodati Stati Uniti - un personaggio come il nostro Mr. B. non sarebbe mai stato preso in considerazione dalla politica?).
E no, il governo Prodi non l'ha fatto cadere la procura di Santa Maria Capua Vetere, ma lo ha fatto cadere il fantasma di una nuova legge elettorale. Le indagini sono state solo una scusa. Amen.

Antonio Gurrado ha detto...

"il governo Prodi non l'ha fatto cadere la procura di Santa Maria Capua Vetere, ma lo ha fatto cadere il fantasma di una nuova legge elettorale"

Negacción de l’evidencia.

(Dall'Inglese allo Spagnolo, che progressi!)

G.

Lisa ha detto...

Gurrado: il tuo commento può essere facilmente volto contro di te.

C'est toi qui nie l'evidence et qui se berlusconise (dall'inglese, allo spagnolo al francese...).

(N. B.:- se berlusconiser/berlusconisation non me lo sono inventato io, come può sembrare; quei simpaticoni dei francesi lo usano davvero - ovviamente, non ci sono implicazioni positive...; se non fai il bravo, la prossima volta ringhio in tedesco! ;) )

Antonio Gurrado ha detto...

Je preferai de me carlabruniser.

G.

Lisa ha detto...

...non avevo dubbi... ;)