The classroom will always be the same, that of the Constituent Assembly of '47. In the meantime, however, 75 years will have passed since, on 31 January 1948, Sardinia, the Mediterranean island, was "elevated" to the rank of Autonomous and Special Region in the parliamentary temple of Deputies. It is in that same parterre , halved in numbers, that the " de profundis " of the Special Autonomy now risks landing, the same "granted" among a thousand ordeals and infinite state pitfalls.
Calderoli, the arsonist
The Draft Law on "Differentiated Regions" "shot" into the media and political ether by the impetuous Minister of Regional Affairs, Northern League member Roberto Calderoli, which went down in history for the bonfire of 375,000 laws defined as useless, is much more than a stake constitutional. In those seven pages, with the overwritten "working draft", disclosed as a manifesto of dogmas and decisions already taken, the most subtle attack on the autonomistic history of the only full-fledged Special Region takes place, if only for that condition insular and ultraperipheral that not even the most ingenious of state conjurers would be able to transform into an optical vision. Calderoli, the Minister, is no longer what he once was. A few decades ago he would have thundered, as many others have done, from the most varied political parties, against those who loved to rhetorically define the "privileges" of the Autonomous Regions. There are, for example, those who now sit in this government, had even gone much further by presenting a bill for the literal cancellation of the Autonomous and Special Region of Sardinia. Times, however, have changed. Now the incursion won't be with club blows and fires, but the strategy will be sneaky and sneaky. The goal is to have the autonomistic Specialty annihilated without ever saying so, proclaiming one's innocence in the face of any attempt at a reaction by some "nostalgic" of Lussu and past history.
Body of the crime
If questioned in front of the punctual examination of the "corpus delicti", the Calderoli Bill, they will say that this "history" of the Special Autonomies is obsolete, worn out and out of time. The reality is, unfortunately, quite different. Experienced constitutionalists and law lovers write it, still under wraps: in no way can a constitutional provision be overcome with an ordinary law, much less with an equivocal and indefinite parliamentary procedure. The substance of the question can be summarized with a concept: the prevailing difference in powers and resources in favor of the Special Regions, indicated as a constitutional principle in the first paragraph of article 116 of the Constitution, cannot be modified except with a law of the same degree . To be more explicit: it must be the Constitution that establishes the possible recognition of the "differentiated" Regions, in this case Veneto, Lombardy and Emilia Romagna, with greater powers than the Special ones. Only in this way will it be possible to alter, limiting or eliminating it, that "positive" difference that the Constituents, and several times the Sovereign People, had sanctioned and recognized to guarantee weak and particular Regions those additional tools to achieve and maintain a true "economic" rebalancing , “social” and “cultural” of their populations.
The creeping twist
Calderoli, however, has changed. No more fires and hatchets. He will never say that he wants to annihilate the Special Regions: if anything, he will support the need to recognize the Regions that ask for it, coincidentally the strongest and those of the North, in the alleged respect of a constitutional provision, paragraph three of the same article 116, a differentiation of powers and above all of greater resources. The theme is that this "ordinary" differentiation, foreseen by "simple" law, cannot in any way alter that "constitutional difference", sanctioned by the Charter of Laws both in terms of powers and above all of resources in favor of the five Special Regions, beyond Sardinia, Sicily, Friuli Venezia Giulia, Valle d'Aosta and Trentino Alto Adige. That of resources is, therefore, the substantial issue. Calderoli's Bill, if an expert in legislative criminology were to examine it, is a confession without appeal. In article 7 of the text of the legislative proposal, the "corpus delicti" emerges.
State trick
The first two paragraphs of the so-called "financial clauses" are, in fact, a clear violation of the constitutional provision which assigns an ideal "positive" difference to the Special Regions, both with respect to ordinary Regions and to hypothetical "differentiated" futures. In the first paragraph it is written: "The application of this law and of each agreement does not result in greater burdens on the public finances". In the second paragraph: «Financial invariance is guaranteed, in relation to the agreements approved by law in implementation of article 116, third paragraph, of the Constitution for the Regions that have not signed any». The first paragraph of article seven essentially states that the recognition of the "differentiated" Regions will not entail new expenditures charged to the public finances. The imaginative translation could, therefore, be: Lombardy, Veneto and Emilia Romagna claim with so much emphasis the aspiration to become "differentiated" for mere institutional "sport". Few, if any, would believe it.
Swag of 21 billion
The reality is that those three Northern Regions want at least 21 billion more, some say 36, overall, per year to be entered in their budgets. So, if the state says it won't spend anything more than its current budget, it means that those resources will still have to be siphoned off somewhere. It is certain, however, that that money exists, whether it comes from indistinct cohesion funds or the result of substantial subtractions from some chapter of particularly greedy or useless expenditure. The constitutional violation is fully committed in the second paragraph when it is stated that financial invariance is guaranteed for the other Regions. Translated it means that no one will lose resources compared to the current ones. In theory, given the times, one could even rejoice. The reality, however, is another. Strong Regions will have much more resources, together with new powers and responsibilities, and Sardinia, for example, would always have the same money. It is here that the "positive" difference envisaged by the Constitution would in fact be violated and cancelled: the Northern Regions will become "very special ordinary" and those which, until proven otherwise, are "constitutionally special" would in fact be transformed into less than ordinary Regions . The blitz would be accomplished without a shot being fired. It would be at the same time a sneaky and effective operation, with a double effect on Sardinia. In practice, the Island would lose its "Speciality" without ever, in 74 years, the permanent and structural rebalancing having been reduced or tackled, precisely linked to its "indisputable" condition as an Island.
Harm and insult
The paradox, beyond the constitutional lesion, is that up to now the State has never wanted to address the economic-financial question and the "structural" powers indispensable to pursue the insular rebalancing of Sardinia. With a repeated "vice" of the state, each time pleading a thousand subterfuges, in Rome they have always maintained the unavailability of resources necessary to fulfill that constitutional provision. Now, however, to consume the "misdeed" of the "differentiated", through an ordinary law, copious resources would be found to manage even with an agreement between the "differentiated" Region and the Government. In practice, the Island of Sardinia, which rose to the rank of Special Region in 1948, would awaken from its long torpor without any rebalancing and be downgraded to a modest ordinary entity. Adding insult to injury. Not only would the Calderoli Bill substantially degrade Sardinia, but it would cause the island to lose its last chance to substantiate the island's rebalancing both economically and in terms of powers. Moreover, today's minister is well aware of the provisions of the law on fiscal federalism, the one approved in 2009, when he personally headed the department of reforms in the Berlusconi government.
Forget about Rome
It was he himself, on behalf of the executive, who endorsed the amendment approved by the Constitutional Commission for Regional Questions precisely on the insular rebalancing. In that provision, in article 22 of law n.42 of 2009, the "measurement" and relative "compensation" of the gap linked to the objective insular condition of Sardinia was arranged. In that case, an implementing decree, in agreement with the Region, would have been enough to define the tools for dealing in a "persistent" way with the true special reason of Sardinia, its irrefutable being an Island. All the implementing decrees envisaged by that reform were approved, one was forgotten, coincidentally that of insularity. The reasoning, even before being constitutional, is logical: if Sardinia does not see that law implemented, strengthened by the recognition of the insular principle just inserted in the Constitution, we will go straight, without shortcuts, towards the constitutional violation.
Insularity first
If, on the other hand, the State really wanted to implement the "differentiated autonomies" smoothly, it should not delay even a moment in drafting and approving, in agreement with the Region, the implementing decree on the insularity of Sardinia, complete with adequate and permanent resources, not alms, to give the island real transport, an integral free zone of insular rebalancing capable of supporting local businesses, attracting real capital and new businesses, including infrastructures capable of breaking the isolation towards inland areas and the Mediterranean. It would also be time, after 75 years, to give the stolen goods back to the island and to the Sardinians. Before the "differentiated" there is to fill the gap in the island.