A discordant reform

  • Italiano

It ‘s absurd to think that the reform of the Constitution is attributed to a reduction in costs. First of all you it’s not easy to understand how a reduction in costs may relate to the organ of maximum expression of representative democracy, the Senate. However, as shown by the General Accounting Office, the saving isn’t  500 million euro, as affirmed by the Minister Boschi, but of 51 million euro, a minimum amount especially if compared to the effect it produces: a decrease in political representation in one of its highest levels.

Inexact is the assertion that the transformation of the Senate, reduced to one hundred senators nominated (it is not known by whom) and chosen (apart from the 5 appointed by the President of the Republic) among the regional councilors and mayors, it would reduce the time for the approval of laws. In fact, many materials are provided in which both Chamber and Senate must vote, but with different procedures: some constitutional experts speak of 12 procedures, other 6, finally, other 4. However, the Senate can always ask to speak about the laws being approved by the Chamber of Deputies and the danger of differences views is strong. For these cases, the constitutional law review speaks of an agreement between the President of the Chamber and the Senate. But if this agreement (as is very likely) is not reached, as it settles the dispute? It will be necessary to resort to Consult with an increase of the time, one year at least.

Incorrect  also is the argument that this constitutional amendment would serve to change the static situation in which our society is. The opposite is correct, this reform, as we shall soon see, is used to “maintain the status quo”, not for “change it.”

Having said that, and coming to the evaluation of the text that is submitted to our referendum question, we should say that, apart from the numerous errors and contradictions that it contains, there are three real changes in the current Constitution: the centralization of executive powers; the transformation of the Senate into a chamber below the rank of the Chamber of Deputies; the destruction of (and this is the most significant change) the guarantee of the constitutional revision under Art. 138. And it should be noted that changing the Senate has expressed very clearly, while the other two amendments are the result of changes that have hidden several items.

Until  4 December vote, Interris.it, without taking a position, it will host the supporters of the “Yes” and “No” in the referendum, to allow readers to freely make their own opinion about it.

Avviso: le pubblicità che appaiono in pagina sono gestite automaticamente da Google. Pur avendo messo tutti i filtri necessari, potrebbe capitare di trovare qualche banner che desta perplessità. Nel caso, anche se non dipende dalla nostra volontà, ce ne scusiamo con i lettori.