In a recent episode of What’s the weather like a hard attack has aired on the government by the director of an authoritative newspaper. A radical dispute, aimed at delegitimizing the current majority and not, as would be physiological and beneficial, to discuss the political proposals on the merits. Sadly, shout out to the incoming boogeyman, on the return of the dark fascist timesto the attack on Constitution remains the only option for a left that, still in search of itself, finds identity only by building a enemy to kill. And he often has the easy game, thanks to the pervasive presence in the media and to an elementary principle of communication whereby if you obsessively repeat a lie, many end up convincing themselves that it is true. But lies remain lies to the test of facts. First lie: it is not true that the country is on fire. On the contrary, he is intent on intercepting the economic growth and benefits of the Pnrr, albeit with a thousand difficulties, he questions profoundly the mismatching between supply and demand for work and reacted compactly in the face of emergencies. Rather, a minority part of it is busy throwing fuel on a few small flames, offering a bad service to the democratic debate.
THE TRANSCRIPTIONS Second lie: it is not true that by denying registration to the children of homoparental couples, the government is trampling on the Constitution. It is not true because the Charter does not express itself on the point even indirectly (and in 1948 it would have been difficult to do so) and it is not true because it was the Court of Cassation, with sentence no. 38162, that expressed itself on the point, judging a practice adopted by the mayor of Milan. The lights on the issue were turned on by the judiciary and not by the government. Third lie: it is not true that differentiated autonomy harms the Constitution, definitively discriminating against a part of the country and undermining the right to health. The current republican constitution provides that a single region can request, and obtain, “particular forms of autonomy” on some matters among those that already have concurrent legislative power between the central state and the regions. Faced with the legitimate autonomist drives of some regions, the Government has opened a discussion of general scope, aiming to obtain a broad institutional consensus, precisely to avoid forward leaps of individuals, although already permitted by the Charter. The fruit was a framework bill agreed with the state-regions conference, which puts all regions on the same level. Equality between citizens is guaranteed by the fact that the attribution of functions is subject to the determination of minimum levels of services (Lep) which guarantee civil and social rights throughout the national territory. Right to health included. Furthermore, it is not true that these are “definitive” choices since the devolution agreements have a ten-year duration and can cease earlier. What would be the definitive injury to the right to health?
Fourth lie: it is not true that the high rent problem undermines the constitutional right to study. Too often we forget that article 34 of the Constitution provides for active policies of support by the State only for the “capable and deserving” and not for anyone. The right to study is first of all guaranteed by the widespread presence of public universities on the territory which, between main and branch offices, now operate in a large part of the Italian provinces. Then, it is guaranteed through public funding from universities, in a much higher per capita share than the fees paid by everyone, fees that are generally very low for the lowest income brackets. The problem of the high cost of university residences is, yes, serious, but it must be seen within the theme of high rents which especially afflicts some large cities; these are age-old issues, mainly the responsibility of local authorities, to which the State is putting its hand with the funds of the Pnrr. It is an important issue to promote student mobility, the growth of the Italian university system and, with it, the growth of the country. An issue to be faced with wisdom and balance, without ideological barriers and without displaying monsters that don’t exist. Fifth lie: there is a tightening of humanitarian permits, which discriminates against migrants, violating the constitutional principle of equality of all citizens referred to in Article 3.
THE ATTACK ON PERMITS Humanitarian permits have not existed for five years. The “permits for special protection”, introduced in 2018, had been expanded by the previous government to include parental reunification, medical treatment and the subsequent transformation into work permits, with substantial circumvention of the flows. The Government has reduced these cases and has strengthened the reception and regular immigration services, implementing sensitivity for the legal entries of the majority of the country. His action, which has been examined by the Quirinale, complies with article 10 of the Constitution. The article, however, is not pertinent: it refers to citizens, not to residents, nor without distinction to anyone; and whoever requests or obtains a residence permit does so precisely because he is not a citizen even though he may have the aspiration to become one. Citizens do not need permits, let alone humanitarian ones. In summary, an interview, many lies, aimed at building the image of a government that is questioning the founding principles of the Constitution, aimed at delegitimizing the majority of the country, not at meeting them, at discussing and identifying growth trajectories for the national community. In comparison we grow, from debate we learn. A serious and serene democratic discussion would be desirable for everyone. Unfortunately, it seems we are still a long way off.
