President Todde's more or less explicit references to the activity of the editorial group L'Unione Sarda force, despite myself, to make some clarifications in favor of the truth.

First of all: as also demonstrated in the recent electoral campaign, our media have stayed far away from factionalism, giving voice to the various political expressions including those that supported the current President, as recognized by those who supported her.

Whatever the side in support of the various regional councils, the basis of the editorial line has always been the defense of Sardinia from any kind of "assault" or "invasion". Just for the record: No to nuclear waste; the No to waste from other Regions; the No to the inappropriate use of military servitudes; the No to energy speculation to the detriment of the Island.

Second: a firm and non-negotiable editorial line, crystal clear and free from any conditioning, political or otherwise, exercised privately by me, as many could testify, and in the pages of this newspaper, website and radio and television services, by the our journalistic editorial teams, to inform the Sardinian community with news, investigations and insights on the topic of the so-called "ecological transition". Projects, companies and personalities connected directly or indirectly to the gigantic speculation operation of which Sardinia is dramatically the object have been brought to the attention of public opinion.

For over twenty years at least we have repeatedly raised the alarm about the wind and photovoltaic invasion - as can be seen from Director Dessì's page published yesterday - and starting from 2021 even with greater intensity due to the entry into force of the infamous Draghi Decree, based main legislation on which the current landscape devastation is based to make the Island the energy battery serving mainland Italy.

And we continued, with growing intensity, with the entry into force of the second "Draghi Decree" of 29 March 2022, entirely dedicated to Sardinia, also nefarious, taking a highly critical position towards the regional council of the time, led by Solinas , resulting in the explicit request for an appeal, which he did.

The veiled inferences of those who, uninformed or in bad faith, attempt to attribute to the newspapers of this editorial group preconceived positions towards one or the other of the sides are therefore devoid of any foundation.

Third: the President of the Region, with a note published here in full, claims to indicate the media as "enemies" of the truth, attempting to introduce a reason for gratuitous and misleading controversy with respect to the real issue: the already ongoing devastation of Sardinia .

Let's get to the essentials, focusing on the last four years:

  • The Draghi decrees, the first relating to renewables and the second dedicated to Sardinia alone, are indisputably and by unanimous and honest recognition responsible for the assault that the island is undergoing, as we have already clearly highlighted in these pages;
  • With editorials and investigations, the Solinas Council was explicitly asked and repeatedly urged to challenge any act detrimental to the interests of Sardinia and the Sardinians, which was done;
  • For the record and intellectual honesty: among the Ministries involved in the drafting and approval of those infamous Draghi decrees there was the Ministry of Economic Development, of which Deputy Minister was the current President of the Region, Alessandra Todde, who was not and was not it could have been foreign to them. The official delegation published in the Official Journal with the appointment decree states verbatim: " The initiatives and activities relating to the inter-ministerial committee for the ecological transition are also delegated to Undersecretary of State Alessandra Todde ". In practice he was an active member of the Ecological Transition Committee, the body responsible for political, legislative and administrative guidance on the matter covered by the Draghi decrees;
  • We take it for granted that the authority of Deputy Minister Todde - considering the timely delegation entrusted to him - was such as to be able to influence those decrees in defense of his Island, which is not currently the case. Nor was our newspaper ever able to record any declarations of dissent or conflict on the part of the then Deputy Minister regarding what was being planned to the detriment of Sardinia.

Fourth: the President's attempt to introduce reasons for controversy concerns law no. 5, approved on 4 July, its effects and its effectiveness. Again, let's get to the essentials:

  • He states in yesterday's note: "Blocking the plants that have already started work is not possible." Not only do we agree, but we wrote and reiterated it, unfortunately in vain, even before the final approval of the law.
  • Law n.5, we have written and rewritten: it doesn't block anything. A clear and clear statement today, in contrast to that made on July 4th by the President of the Region, who declared: «The question we are often asked is what happens to the authorizations that have already been given? These authorizations are temporarily suspended."
  • We have underlined on several occasions since the first day of the approval of that law that it did not contain the institution of "temporarily suspended authorisations". An attempt was made to mitigate, in words, the total ineffectiveness of the newly approved rule.

Fifth: the President of the Region in the note on the topic of blocking authorized projects states: «to expect that with a law it is possible to block already authorized plants, with works having started several months ago, is unreasonable and exposes the Region to high requests for compensation» .

Also in this case we note that:

  • A similar situation, without any speculative alarm as in this case, occurred in 2004 when a temporary safeguard rule was adopted. In that case the Regional Law of 25 November 2004, n.8, in art.4 had regulated and blocked all the subdivisions of the homogeneous zones C, D, F and G where the road network had not been created or a significant change had occurred and irreversible of the state of the places. Many subjective rights were violated and trampled upon, but the law passed the test of resistance.
  • The same case could have been effectively introduced to stop at least temporarily, and not in words, the wind and photovoltaic assault for projects and construction sites in progress that had not yet caused a "consistent and irreversible change in the state of the places". It was chosen not to do so, and citizens should be explained why.
  • Given the very serious and irreversible landscape compromise, the Region could have legislated in full analogy with the law recently approved by Parliament, relating to the declaration of "nullity" of all projects already approved and falling within the area relating to the Einstein Telescope. Even in this case it would have been enough to want it.

Instead, the Region passively accepted the 6.2 GW of additional renewables from the Government, which is also a minimum limit, and offshore wind.

Sixth: authorization procedures:

  • The approved rule says nothing about authorization procedures and the only, indefinite and confusing prohibition is that of "realizing";
  • While no intervention on the authorization procedures at state level could be regulated, the Region could well have introduced an urban planning regulation pursuant to art. 3, letter "f", of the autonomous Statute of Sardinia, dating back to 1948, as suggested by several taken up by this newspaper, by eminent Sardinian constitutionalists and by numerous committees created to defend our common home;
  • The only legislative instrument that could have blocked state and regional procedures was and is the "urban planning" ban on building wind, photovoltaic and agrivoltaic power plants in areas already declared "unsuitable", according to the detailed map in the possession of the Region, published on this newspaper and which would save 98.8% of the territory already subject to various constraints. Even on this point, which is totally ignored, much will have to be explained.

Seventh and finally: rather than making generic and denigrating insinuations - to throw it into politics or chaos, typical of a world to which we do not belong - it would be better to clearly and unequivocally denounce who we are referring to when we talk about " characters with dubious morals and pockets of power intent on exclusively pursuing their own interests ."

President Todde could start with subjects that perhaps she herself knows well, both for wind and photovoltaic matters and for airport matters.

Sergio Zuncheddu

© Riproduzione riservata