Pnrr: Conte’s flags, Draghi’s action and EU fixations
How the Italian Recovery Plan has changed between Conte and Draghi. While the bureaucratic rigidity of the Brussels Commission has not changed. Polillo's comment
Giuseppe Conte, after weeks of silence, chose to prove his existence in life by spending himself in favor of the super building bonus, which was to become, according to an old 5-star position, a measure of a structural nature. Identity position, like citizenship income, more than a concrete measure to guarantee what was promised. No foreclosure against this incentive, except for the consideration of its administrative complexity in its management. So, as Mario Draghi tried to make understand, before shooting the moon it would have been better to ascertain the actual draft of that measure, to measure its actual impact on the reality of the country.
Eventually common sense prevailed. The long-awaited extension to 2023 is contemplated in the Recovery Plan, but the related allocations will be defined in the budget law. The next day – at least we hope – to have the precise data on its actual use. In fact, there is nothing to prevent fear that, like so many reforms of the period that has just passed, this too has remained on paper. A little withered flag of a movement desperate for a new identity.
Too severe judgment? The truth is that the flaws of the yellow-red period are coming to a head. Let's start with Mario Draghi's joke, in his comparison, with Ursula Von der Leyen. "In the new PNRR, underlines the premier – writes Enrico Marro of Corriere della Sera – there are 40 pages out of 334 on the reforms, while in the old Conte Plan only one". Not a small observation, which highlights a very different philosophy. The prevailing logic of the old Plan was nothing more than a simple distribution of financing. Today, however, attempts are being made to modify, with reforms, some resource allocation mechanisms, in order to determine cumulative development effects. Even if the unknowns that remain, are not few.
From this point of view, the timely did not help. Some contradictions that also remain in the Recovery Plan are the result of past mistakes. Above all of the scarce and not very incisive presence of Italy in the various European offices. In which a bureaucratic logic inevitably dominates. The decisions, which take place over time, are part of supply chains that have their own autonomous development. If no action is taken from the start, it becomes impossible to substantially change the course of events.
This is what happened in the green sector, to which 37 percent (the absolute highest share) of the available resources must be allocated. A fixed non-negotiable percentage. That is, identical for any country. Regardless of the policies implemented in previous years to protect the environment and to combat the effects of global warming. In Italy, according to the Recovery Plan , already in the past “there have already been some significant progress: between 2005 and 2019, Italy's greenhouse gas emissions decreased by 19 percent. To date, greenhouse gas emissions per person, expressed in tonnes equivalent, are below the EU average ”.
“As regards the circular economy – continues the document – Italy is positioned above the EU average for investments in the sector and for the productivity of resources. The rate of use of circular material in Italy was 17.7 percent in 2017 and the recycling rate of municipal waste at 49.8 percent, both above the EU average ". While, looking at energy, "policies in favor of the development of renewable sources and energy efficiency have allowed Italy to be one of the few countries in Europe (together with Finland, Greece, Croatia and Latvia) to have exceeded both 2020 targets on the subject. The penetration of renewable energies stood at 18.2% in 2019, against a European target of 17%. Furthermore, primary energy consumption in 2018 was 148 Mtoe against a European target of 158 Mtoe ".
Elements that should feed a justified pride, but also not a few questions. Rather than providing a number – 37 per cent – the same for all, was it not appropriate to introduce elements of flexibility to favor convergence towards a common goal? Therefore envisage a greater commitment for the countries left behind and less for those countries, such as Italy, which have already started along the road of civil commitment. But if this was the most reasonable solution, what has Italy done in the past to make it prevail?
It should only be added that reducing that share, for a country like Italy, could have involved a greater commitment in those sectors, such as training or the labor market, in which Italian differentials, compared to other European countries, they are downright embarrassing. Which raises a more general problem. In a Europe dominated by bureaucracy, the temptation is to establish rigid general rules, which reflect the interests, the way of operating or the culture of the countries most present in the preliminary phase, which accompanies the individual decisions. And where Italy, most of the time, is silent, if not completely absent.
This is a machine translation from Italian language of a post published on Start Magazine at the URL https://www.startmag.it/economia/pnrr-le-bandierine-di-conte-lazione-di-draghi-e-le-fissazioni-ue/ on Sun, 25 Apr 2021 14:34:31 +0000.