Speaker of the House to the National Party
I thank the chairman of the party and all friends of the national executive and parliamentary groups, and I think this meeting is an appointment useful and necessary to clarify certain aspects. There is need for proper respect that everyone has to say to himself, and even more for the respect that all together we have the Italians. We owe it to those Italians who, and should never be forgotten, have confidence to the people of liberty, have given confidence to the government and allowed the PDL to win the 2008 elections and subsequently allowed the coalition to confirm the consensus that enjoys in public opinion. A meeting is needed and it should be, from me, used to try to explain what is happening.
I do not want to use expressions that may seem unnecessary controversy, but frankly it seems to me that even in directing and initiating the work of an attitude towards us was a bit 'childish of those who almost want to hide the dust under the carpet. As if we do not talk about exactly what it is, or as if the Italians last week they had seen another film, they did not realize that freedom is going on in the People anything.
But this is certainly not a matter of controversy, and I hope that this is not the reason for the dispute. What is happening? It's happening on some matters of a strictly political - for those who are the country's problems, related to what is the government's action, about what is the role of the party - one of the co-founders (I discovered that we were many co-founder in the PDL) has different views than those of Prime Minister Berlusconi. Which of course is not to deny that the government has done to date. Many of the things that they said the ministers are aware of the direction of Italian and are the reason for the renewed consensus that voters give the center-right.
have opinions different from the prime minister and the president of the party - whose leadership has never been questioned - is to exercise what I believe is a clear right and duty. And I ask, first, a question of different opinions can be declassified, or if you want the different assessments, or other indications that are not coincident with that every day is the PDL? You can derubicare this as if it were simple matters of personal character?
If they were personal issues would not come to this direction with the that there has been controversy and even with this waiting for what will happen today. They are not my whims, I'm not jealous of what the Prime Minister is, God forbid. I'm used when I disagree, to say what I think. And let me tell you because obviously, I did not point blank, as if suddenly no more I liked what I helped to set up.
few months is that I ask the questions, a few months and I see these questions raised at best dismissed as personal matters, or in some cases, I see them be minimized. For goodness sake, maybe they do not deserve much attention. But I do not think that matters posed to interfere with the action, much less to obstruct the action of the party, certainly are not questions that are asked to please opponents. See Bondi, has been some drop style, to quote some statements that certainly can be, and in some cases, are, polemics against the President of the Council and to forget that for asking questions in the past months have been in many instances of media and journalistic treatment by fellow handsomely paid for by close relatives of the President of the Council, without, however, it determines a position. I do not think that is cause for controversy: we know what are the property of their newspapers. We know that the publishers are paying directors. Issues that are certainly removed from the list of issues that we discuss today.
I begin by asking questions. To say that some events, some problems on some thing to do we have different views is a demonstration of high treason, to the point of media deserve beatings, the setting of fires or even layoffs as it does for employees infidels? Or is - and I'll tell Berlusconi in his face as he is often told us in private - is a demonstration of loyalty? See the betrayal, which is the circle of human behavior undignified, thrives in those who are accustomed to applause, public adulation, but then say anything when the leader turns his back. Rarely is the betrayal in the consciousness of who assumes responsibility for what they think in private and in public.
I consider it a matter of loyalty. You have the right of reply, I take a positive note. I think it's fair to play cards, do not think it treason to say that some things we can and must do better. It is a demonstration of loyalty, in my view, out of the chorus of those who say that all is well. Certainly there have been many positive things, there would be no reason to give a negative assessment of what has been the experience of freedom of the people and government. I
that a stimulus in a constructive spirit to those who say that on some issues can do more, that on some issues there may be a line that is not one hundred percent that has been followed so far. It is, I believe, a contribution of duty and loyalty that clearly assumes that they are not personal opinions. Minority views may be, certainly yes, opinions can be shared by a majority do not share our ruling class, and then the electorate. I do not ironic when the prime minister feels the pulse of public opinion, trying to figure out what they think the Italians. I think the prime minister, a wise man he is, for many reasons it is asked why I am doing for many months some say Jiminy Cricket, the contrarian or even the arsonist who wants to destroy the house he helped build. It so happens that the Italians continue to consider some things I say worthy of attention, without conceit. It is not a count, is a photograph of a condition that is: some opinions, minority, however, a certain consensus. So I do not think that recognizing the freedom of opinion in a party can represent the loss of a duty of loyalty.
The PDL has proven to be a democratic party, who discusses, who vote, but a democratic party especially in the European bipolarity in that bipolarity is one of the great merits of the PDL and Berlusconi, in a two-party democratic party means a party that accepts that there is not only inside, obviously, the debate and then vote, and then the prevailing line, but accepting a plurality of views, positions, and inside there may be some indication also very different from that which then goes to the eldest. And do not believe that it means a leadership challenge.
Bondi said to come from a tradition that knew the degeneration of internal rules, it was the tradition of democratic centralism. Even in the Communist Party was discussed and then voted and there was a majority. But be careful - And here I do not want to be controversial - not to move from centralism democratic centralism charismatic.
not contest the leadership of Berlusconi, wondering if it's legal to have different opinions and try to organize within the party area on certain political and cultural opinions can be found. That does not mean return to the old, because the bipolar and the novelty of the times in which we live. The currents were typical of the parties, I'm not in trouble are reminded that when the speaker called the current one metastasis, they were designed to capture slices of internal power. I think at this time who said "go ahead Gianfranco because you have a point "has brought to account, first, to lose some share of power. It is not aimed at a current share of power. It is on the other, it is certainly spark a debate and then ends with the vote but starting from positions which are also somewhat dissimilar between them.
I said that in the bipolar system, which is the greatest achievement in these times, there can be no orthodoxy, and then there can be no heresy, and then there can be no one who is burned at the stake if he has different opinions because bipolarity is so all over Europe. We want to look at what happens in the big European family? Not only those of the Party popular but also that of the Socialist Party? We want to look for a moment what is the internal dialogue all'Ump French? The German CDU? At the same movement of Aznar's party? Or what of Cameron? Positions that are certainly living far away, but then there is the duty of a synthesis that is the result of a confrontation without demonizing. A comparison based on the respect due to dissimilar views. And I think there is a right and duty on my part to clarify this concept because we are on a day that changed the dynamics of the PDL.
If there is a component of a political and cultural issues have on some of the views that are different from those prevailing certainly not all rights: no right, for the avoidance of doubt, to sabotage the government action or rowing always against. Why has the duty of loyalty to a project that derives from a pact between the founders and the voters. It has no right to impose on others the minority views. She does, however, yes, the right to discuss how to implement well the program of government, how to avoid that there may be positions on some issues that are not in tune with public opinion. Animate a comparison from this point of view, can not do well. And the more this will be free of demonizing and free from suspicion that it is designed to prevent the government to govern, the more positive the PDL, the Government and the country.
is certain is that today - and have figured this all - is not a phase that has been the deployment of the PDL. Today, no longer makes sense to talk of "quotas". Today there is a large part of the party that shares sostazialmente in full what is the action of the Prime Minister, who is head of the party, and there is a small component, call it what you want - and not the current in the negative sense - who does not share more in its entirety. Because even here is not the ruling opposition: of course the government's action was positive, but the problem is not that. The problem is that In my view, the PDL has done great things, and animated action of a government that is doing great things and some do not consider the enemy to fight, on some issues is losing what was his primary identity, its raison d'etre.
What was the PDL when we built together, giving everyone something to, affected by the organizations? It was certainly a great national party that some of us had dreamed, thinking that the Italians called party or the party of the nation, inspired by the values \u200b\u200bof the European People's Party. Guarantor of the cohesion of the entire country, able to give concrete answers to the needs of workers, businesses. Defender of the meaning of the state, as claimed Falcone is an internalized value, it is a superstructure at least for a certain political culture. Guarantor of the legality of civil rights. Engine profound changes, reforms in the public interest, shared as much as possible. And I thank you, Chairman, said today it clearly when you say that reforms should be done with the widest possible sharing. There is no disagreement on this. It is not the current that says no a priori. If we had understood each other better, we would have avoided this, because until recently it seemed that this was not the prevailing attitude in the PDL. The PDL has not betrayed this identity: but in some areas the glaze is a bit 'lost.
The coalition won the elections, of course. They are so biased that I have little difficulty in saying that in some cases, has won the election Mr Berlusconi personally, from Rome, where, however, President, now that the campaign is over, but you really believe that the list has not been presented a conspiracy of bad judges and violent radicals? The story in my opinion deserves to be deepened and a serious party, now that you do not vote and the elections are behind, should look into. But it is a detail. The coalition won the elections, but within the coalition the PDL, which has had the success they deserve Having regard to the effective action the government - and I say this without irony - than in 2005 has a negative balance and there is an imbalance between the North and South in the South the PDL is well, the North has lost support and lost it by a high for the emergence of a trend abstentions - on which we must reflect and not only hit the center but the entire policy, which is a sign of tiredness towards the parties - but especially those things did not go as well as they could go because there was an imbalance between us and our unique, better, best ally: the League.
without getting bored, in 2005 under the League's voting coalition accounted for 16% electorate in 2010 is 29% and in 2005 the League was not first in any province of the North in 2010 is the first in nine northern provinces. It's not a big problem. When Berlusconi says, "but they are our allies, we must take into account their needs," does not shock me, I was not born yesterday, elections are won in this system with the covenants. But we ask why it happened. Let there dall'equivoco "Fini said that we lost." We have not lost, the coalition has won the Prime Minister is right when he says I put my face and we won.
But for the PDL - because together we had a party and we have to deal welfare, health, organization of the party - we want to understand why the North things did not go as hoped? Ignazio La Russa tried to explain, but I was not convinced one hundred percent.
There were people who came to say "if you Fini immigration continues to say the things you say is obvious that the North wins hands down the league." But then we have to agree, not only in our consciousness but also with our political culture because if we claim to be a great national party, which is based on the values \u200b\u200bof the European People's Party and then starts from the fundamental value of respect human dignity. Then
I'm not the contrarian, who says something to hurt the prime minister, but when so many are - to please the League - is given over to possible actions on immigration for which a child who is the son of an immigrant who loses work and residence permit is then expelled from schools as if it were a child set b. Respect for human dignity! You can not say that it is not true, because it close its eyes to the truth is not wise. And even here, who was in the government remember that we discussed. There has been a reason why it was not introduced at the time of the crime of illegal immigration, because the account could not be what it was. It is heretical to say that I do not find us in the EPP values, respect for human dignity when I hear that doctors need to make lamp, that when an illegal immigrant goes to the hospital should be reported to the police?
friends tell you with my heart in my hand, do not make interest or the PDL nor Berlusconi saying that they are lies. Why are the problems which confront each other in many cases, our directors, are dramatically present problems, discuss it, we try to correct them. Some questions were posed in a careless or if you want without providing all the consequences. So I do not think the issue in the North report PDL-League is the result that as Fini and a group of heretics intellectuals say certain things then the votes will take the league. Do
another reading. But it's not that I do now. For months we tell - and here the irony and the charges. In the North we have become a photocopy of the League. President, many sdi those in the North are now saying "charity for Fini, who are saying" are those that say it is dramatically true, what is the flag of identity of the PDL in the North? There is high that we have launched the message that while the program was to abolish the provinces? The league does not want. We show that the North has raised the banner of privatization of municipal? That have become the hoard of directors leaguers waiting to get their hands on banks with foundations? I consider the League a political subject of primary importance, with a leader Bossi who knows exactly what he wants.
is not the polemic against the League. And I have tried to establish the PDL. Not to give a single association with the League. That are allies, but some values \u200b\u200bare not the same. The League is a strategic ally, but the only flag in the North raised by the coalition is the federalism against which I have nothing but under certain conditions. But it appears that federalism - the culture League certainly did - and to provide for the organization of the school that seems to be the prerogative of both regions, that there should be only in Lombardy Lombardy professors? To my knowledge, this has been discussed. This means that the identity of the League is clear, less than the PDL.
President Berlusconi is the third politician who is in a particular situation and environment: it is both party president and prime minister. I think the party should put in some cases the prime minister in the state in relations with allies to oppose certain applications. Or if you want to raise some bandiere.Senza go too far back in time, at a time when De Mita was president of the Christian Democrats and chairman of the National Executive Council was telling the president that requests Socialists were excessive. Is an example to say that the condition in which Berlusconi is now is to use his party to assert an identity that is not the identity of a subject certainly loyal, but loyal to the government. The interest of the league does not necessarily coincide with the interests of the government. And this does not mean rowing against. And
Below some flattening on the league is dangerous, in the era of federalism. It is dangerous not only to the North, but especially in the central-. The point is, in the South is a growing concern because it has the feeling that some strategic lines of the government are directed by the culture League. Then it grows again when it turns out that to resolve an issue that is very dear to the league - such as milk quotas - has used the funds for underdeveloped areas. Tremonti is right to put the needs of these operations. But then it is true that there are other initiatives. Like many northern MPs, dear Berlusconi, many of the South are telling me that "you are right trying to tell you to Berlusconi on this issue.
Now the chickens are coming home to roost. Here's the place where you want to discuss this. Fiscal federalism and is a great opportunity, but when resources are few must be careful not to create imbalance. But it is only an example.
The concern in the central- for a prevalence also a cultural exercise that the league is in government and Berlusconi then I'll tell you what I know that bothers you, but I gotta say, I told you a thousand times in private , do I have to say in public, otherwise we do not understand: as many parliamentary North come to me and tell me "You're right there is the hegemony of the League", others are in the South say "You're right, tries to convince you that Berlusconi Today we got many votes in the South, we won the elections for the southern vote, but now the chickens are coming home to roost. "
Nodes that want to help dissolve, do not want to tangle. But I want the places I will be discussing the possibility to speak my mind. I want to see if for example on fiscal federalism feel the same way. I do not want to open a quarrel with Tremonti. Tremonti was minister and is the best possible at this stage, otherwise we end up like Greece. But in an era of scarce resources or fiscal federalism is a great opportunity to empower the ruling class or, without some caution, without any antidotes that are related to national culture and a sense of ownership, could undermine social cohesion. The decrees that the government should do are extremely dangerous if they are written without as North Star League, but please do not ensure the interests national.
I will never say that Bossi is not sensitive to national interests, but I understand for the PDL, which is also my party, the decrees of fiscal federalism should be made at any cost? This is the position of the League. I say it should be done, yes, but consistent with the financial and national values \u200b\u200bindisputable. So maybe it will be the case - and here's the proposal because I do not want to make a speech stressing that only things that do not go, but also aims to give an indication - to build not just in government but in a party committee with our governors North and Centrosud? Because with all due respect to two allies Zaia and Cota which the logic of Governors of the North, we want to understand in dealing with the governors of the South, we can not listen to the ministers or governors allies. That we have to define the logic in a dynamic party. We in the PDL MPs know what they are talking about when it comes to fiscal federalism. It is provocative to ask, and not in conflict with Tremonti, "But the costs they have foreseen?". When will reason with the League of the costs of fiscal federalism and what it means to put the southern regions in the ideal condition, the theoretical point of view, the funding that comes not on spending but on the historical cost standard, we checked out what it means in terms of services? You task of the minister certainly Lease, but is also the task of the party. So I think a committee that works on a road map, costs, risks of fiscal federalism can be made immediately.
But there is another big question, said Ignatius, to understand if we are truly a great national party, aware of the importance of certain values. Ignatius said that we are on the eve of the 150th anniversary of the Unification of Italy, then why there was still no suggestion of the party. It is mischievous to say the resources are too limited? Those resources are scarce because the League on these issues is disinterested. I do not say Tremonti is that the League, I say that Tremonti has to take account of the reasons the coalition. When we hear that the resources should be put to another ally maybe not sorry. When
Padania, not Farefuturo, not the century of Italy, he writes, quote, "Unification of Italy? But there will never be celebrated, "there is a certain cultural attitude. The PDL has a duty to respond or not? I say that a great national party for the 150th Unit of the resources is because when asked Bossi resources for other resources issues are. So I do not think I'm the heretic if I say that so the identity is likely to fade. The theme of national identity is not nostalgia, and I will not bore you with platitudes such as those cheering on our country.
is clear that in three years, the overall opinion on the government will be relative to what has been done to manage the economic crisis, the conditions under which you will find families and Italian companies. In three years, when it comes to the end of the term, unless we did something real and concrete than what we've done, I do not just optimism. Berlusconi is right when he speaks of optimism, but optimism is also close to reality.
So I do not believe a heresy to say if I say that the party majority of the coalition, giving the prime minister and a great economy minister, has a duty to reflect on a very simple thing: the election program was written in another era, when there had been no crisis overall. That program contained commitments that I do not think you can keep one hundred percent between now and 2013. Because it will be very difficult to simultaneously reduce the tax burden for businesses and families to be stable revenue and, moreover, by launching the revolution that fiscal federalism is that, as everyone knows, in the first phase costs.
Then request that the PDL is heresy to convene, for example, were a sort of general economic to take stock of what is realistic to do between now and the end of the term and what can not be expected to accomplish? Recall the IMF said yesterday that that GDP will grow less than expected, I do not welcome, I grieve, but without the resources will be difficult to lower taxes on businesses and families and when will the next election campaign citizens require it.
should not regard it as heresy to restructure the program based on what you can do. And not only discuss this among ourselves but also with those who understand? And yet is it not time to say maybe an uncomfortable truth: that if we make our children feel better tomorrow sacrifices should be demanded. We have three years, if we take actions that really change the lives of Italians. We must do what is strategically right: hypothetical reforms, not just the institutional, but structural ones. Sacconi knows very well: we need to discuss the welfare of the opportunities, as well as interventions on the welfare system. It is likely that this is not immediately popular, but maybe you'll determine a lot of spendable resources, then in another. In this way, this will be a party that not only helps the government action, but it also directs more. What is the point, moreover, remain tied to an age of 2008 and a program that is dated because it was written before the international crisis? Tremonti himself has insisted. Of all these issues I think it must speak the PDL.
Then there is the other big issue, related to the issue of legality, which means certainly be proud of what the police are arresting many criminals, of that precise and meticulous record of success, but there is also something more. It is essential to reform the justice and combat the politicization of the judiciary, can not in any way mean never, not even giving the slightest impression that the reform of justice that seeks to make the PDL should aim to ensure more bags of impunity. I know not, but sometimes the impression there. The impression such as when there is then we read that when the prescription was expected as there were 600 thousand short processes erased overnight, disguised amnesty. But explain to me which means protection of the law, judicial reform, fight against politicized judiciary if we pass these messages? This is political debate, this is cultural diversity. We are not going to be the contrarian, but we intend to try to keep faith with the values \u200b\u200bin which we all recognize.
Finally the last question, because I talked too much, but I hope what I said has been understood not only here but also in the public eye, which is much less distant than it might seem. The last question is that of reforms. I had prepared an argument, but I speak because Berlusconi has started a new policy of first importance when he said that the reforms are - I would say that an essential reform, the League or the League, is the redesign of the Title V, skills State of the Regions and powers clearly defined, because of the EU and risk a huge dispute. Reform of Parliament, a new form of government do not speak anymore because it is text that has been said President of the Council: the reforms we need to do so as shared as possible.
But to do at least need to know what is the starting position of the PDL. I will not argue with Calderoli foot fast leading to the Quirinale draft. It is a detail, because I was told "That's the draft Calderoli. But I am a heretic, are contrarian when I say "I do see a draft of the PDL, my party, the party that I helped found with you all?". We can discuss the reform of the Constitution if we do not even know what we want, if not for the headlines? We want to translate them into a proposal? The task of the majority party in the coalition, who was born with the will to change Italy, you give others the drafts under discussion and not take them and then perhaps discuss them as if they were after the bills that must be honored.
Here I said it all and I hope I have demonstrated that my desire is not to sabotage, but to improve the quality of party politics and therefore of the government, which is already worthy of wide support. We have created a miracle in Italian politics, the PDL. Now let us discuss how to make it work. Today that is no more logic 70-30, Berlusconi will do what he wants, from my point of view must acknowledge that something has changed, but face it, I do not care, because one of the stupidest things that was said was that on the organization chart. I refer to the decisions of the president of my party, do whatever he wants, but discuss it. Here, too, and you know I do not say a heresy. This is a party that has made great efforts. Verdini was very good, with Bondi and Russia, but have you wondered why not in a tiny town in Sicily, but the two parties live PDL and the PDL Sicily that is not driven by a man who wants to sabotage Fini. No, it is led by a man of the Berlusconi government, by Micciché. And in that region, which is a large region, it happened that the inability to dissolve the political issues has changed even the majority.
So do not pose a real problem when I say "We want to discuss how well the organization?". We want to discuss what it means ensuring the spaces, but not of space power, space for debate and discussion for those who bring the ideas? They may not like it, can be suggested to burn, but I think before you do, if there is a will - and for us there - to help you grow healthier, stronger than the common creature, then before throw these ideas at least be examined.
Speech at the meeting of the national leadership of the PDL, April 22, 2010
0 comments:
Post a Comment