The Minister of Infrastructure and Transport Matteo Salvini has announced, as an imminent measure, the so-called "house-saver", consisting, no more and no less, of a set of rules aimed, as a whole, at bringing into compliance those properties which present some "small discrepancies" within them, thus making them, so to speak, marketable.

According to the words of the vice-premier himself, we are essentially working towards a building peace bill that would affect approximately eighty percent of Italian real estate. Beyond the political disputes on "whether" it could be a building amnesty or a pure and simple regulatory reorganization project necessitated by the interpretative uncertainties of the regulations currently in force, it would rather be more useful to understand whether this unprecedented project, in its substantial consistency, and in its desire to be understood as a housing policy tool to be aimed at the recovery, through energy requalification interventions (at least so it would seem to be believed), of those buildings that are less efficient in terms of savings from a green perspective , it will be really useful to everyone.

Meanwhile, because the Housing Plan already in place had been introduced at the time by article 11 of legislative decree number 112 of 2008. Therefore, because, since then, the primary aim of the legislation introduced was to guarantee that on the entire national geographical context were satisfied, and in particular with reference to socially and economically disadvantaged categories, those minimum housing conditions necessary to ensure an adequate and dignified level of development of the human person and, therefore, the full implementation of even Article 2 of the Italian constitution. Finally, because, if we consider it carefully, at the time, it was intended to remedy what appeared, in the perception of the generality of the associates, as a real emergency of the real estate market, at the time determined by the considerable reduction in housing demand and by the simultaneous increase in mortgage rates.

Therefore, saying it otherwise, it would be important to understand whether Matteo Salvini's so-called "house-saving" can fit into the finalistic groove of that original "House Plan", thus acquiring an autonomous teleologism directly attributable to the previous one and fully justifiable in the current context , or instead cannot be said to be beneficial to the announced purpose. Let's understand ourselves even better to put it in simple words: the regulatory measure announced by the Minister of Infrastructure and Transport and vice-premier is in itself suitable for encouraging the increase in Italian real estate and encouraging new buildings as well as recovering those already exist? Will it actually comply, in its literal wording and its substantial consistency, with the relevant European legislation? If the answer is in the affirmative, amnesty or no amnesty or however you prefer, then they should not (the use of the conditional always seems necessary), probably, pose obstacles to the introduction of a measure to support the population and small landowners immobile, but rather, it would be useful to unite the forces of the majority and opposition to encourage the development of an intervention program that is good in intent, but can always be perfected on an operational level. Even more so when, according to the government opposition, in particular the Democratic Party through Dario Franceschini, it is an "unconstitutional" provision that could lead to a "devastation of the Italian territory".

But if this were the case, or at least if there could be even just the risk of such a situation occurring, and in the end everything could ultimately be determined by the way in which the rule comes to formal consistency, then it would not remain, for precisely, that of participating in the formation of a project that can truly benefit all Italians. The different positions of the Parties, both majority and opposition, could well be defined as physiological moments of Government activity, but they should still find a unitary constructive outcome to combine, perfecting, the different ideological nuances and thus satisfy the needs of the general public. If through the provision coming from the Ministry of Infrastructure we can even respect the purpose of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan, then cooperation on the part of all political forces should be considered necessary. Each provision should be relevant only in the strict terms of practical usefulness and compliance with current legislation on a general constitutional and systematic level.

Giuseppina Di Salvatore

(Lawyer – Nuoro)

© Riproduzione riservata