At dawn the first phone call with Renzi. Less than two hours after the emergency meeting at Palazzo Chigi, to take stock of a situation that suddenly thwarted by a scenario was turned into a real crisis. Carlo Calenda, Minister of Economic Development, is still much heard from the prime minister on European issues dealt with an air in the brief period of Italian Representative in Brussels, puts for a few minutes in the second floor of the ministry priorities for a wide-ranging on Brexit cyclone.
Minister, the government is studying possible emergency measures?
As is obvious for a major G7 country like ours, the government has also worked on the scenario Brexit considering risks and responses. But for now I stick to the words of Renzi: the government will protect by any means necessary stability and savers. Continued on page 15 Continued from page 1 “Anyway these days will be critical European responses, related to the Berlin meeting on Monday and the EU Council on Tuesday and Wednesday. Tomorrow I will be in Brussels in preparation for the Council. From these two appointments will necessarily emerge guidelines, need to understand that before this crisis there is an institution made up of leaders, ideas, proposals. ”
What is the answer that Italy will propose at the EU level?
An answer which starts from the redefinition of governance, involving a more assertive policy, faster institutions, a clarity in defending their interests at European level much more clear and i think, for example, from my observation, the surreal discussion there has been on the possible recognition of the market status to China. It must defeat the idea that stand still or go back is a form of protection. Convince citizens not to be defeated by the future need to play offense.
Do you think the real risk of Britain emulation?
The emulation risk exists and has many variations, see Netherlands and Poland. Today the building is very fragile and the temptation for national leadership to discharge the responsibilities on Europe is very strong. It triggers in this way a vicious circle in which the euro crisis is derived from that of the Member States and replenishes itself. At the bottom there is an epochal crisis of Western democracies. Globalization, presented naively in the early 90′s as a linear process and without contradictions, brought 1 billion people out of poverty in developing countries but has split in two by dividing our society clearly winners and losers. Elderly to young, middle class toward elite, internationalized and domestic companies. The distances are increased, the fear of the future and rejection of modernity have taken over. technological innovations too, fast, displace and scare.
How to get out?
First, by acting on institutions in Europe as in the United States. Brexit detonates a governance crisis that Europe already had. Because the intergovernmental model as the predominant than Community has mire action: tend to be led to say that the Member States have very big responsibility, as I got to see in the business where the strategy to bring expertise on a national basis is killing the EU trade policy. Here too, the temptation is to stop. We forget, however, that Europe is the area of the world with the lowest protection and that thrives on exports. so we have to, as I said, come back to play up front, complete through the agreements with Canada and the US the alliance of countries that accept the same rules and high standards. Only then we will resume the helm of globalization rebalancing effects.
But strengthen European governance can really be enough?
In recent months, the debate on the institutions was very low so as not to influence the British referendum. But now the king is naked, and this becomes the central theme. But the reshaping of the governance, both at European and national basis, is the enabling infrastructure on top of which rests any effective policy solution, even for this institutional reform is essential in Italy. Besides the work on the European institutions we need to define a few clear priorities to work from tomorrow. The first external dimension: the common security and defense, migration to compact and commercial policy. Second investment of culture, education and innovation where we need a lot more leeway in terms of European and national budgets. Investment in human capital and innovation are the only ones able to close the gap between companies, citizens and generations giving the intellectual tools and materials to face the future with greater awareness. Through the investments they treat the social and cultural inequalities.
He plans new tools to boost growth through investment?
Allow more flexibility to Member on these specific chapters. It is important to be able to adapt their investment policies to the specific needs of states, being very careful to consider eligible investments only those directly linked to economic activity. In Italy for competitiveness investing in kindergartens it is as important as investing in machinery. To do all this politics must regain possession of a large, long thought, starting from a deep understanding of the fears that nourish populism. In this crisis of confidence and identity he is answered with the quiet strength of a vision and an “industrial” plan for the country that is well explained to citizens.
We can start again from the Juncker plan or need to go further?
This Commission has started to reverse course, with Juncker plan as well as with communication on flexibility. Juncker The plan goes well, should be strengthened, but now it is important to give space for national investment, because each country still has its specificity. But it requires courage, not choices at a reduced impact.
Can you give us some examples?
Think of the compact migration that Italy has submitted to Commissione.Finora funds for development, 10 billion annually, they were given no relation to the priorities for the migration. The idea was to review the mechanism by finalizing the use of current investments and building a line of own resources, the European, which can be bond or credit lines that result from a European tax. But then the Commission, in view of the British referendum, chose a small-scale solution where the element of own resources there. It was a mistake that will be corrected.
Have you developed estimates of the possible impact-Brexit for our real economy?
In the index of “sensitivity” elaborated by S & amp; P we penultimate. We have a strong export to Britain but the Sace has estimated an impact content ranging from 600 million to 1.7 billion of the total 414 billion and exports of goods. So I’m not worried. If you ask me possible impacts in terms of GDP resulting from reflections of Brexit on global growth I say that right now nobody knows. This is not a shock isolated, since 2008 we have had one, economic or geopolitical, every six months because we are at a crossroads in history. It will not end with Brexit, this requires a structure of increasingly strong institutions capable of responding to this change.
The UK is a historic advocate of free trade. Not afraid of death to the TTIP agreements with the United States and Canada with Ceta?
From the point of view of weights within the board the backlash can definitely be there. But the problem is deeper. We were the only European country to support the request of the Commission to approve the treaty with Canada with the vote of the Council and the European Parliament without going through 38 national parliaments. We fill our mouths with high claims of Europeanism, but then when it comes to budget the Commission to manage migration and to recognize the competence on trade policy as foreseen by the Treaties, we are often the only ones to show consistency.
Consider possible that Britain remains in the EEA with a regime like that of Norway or Switzerland?
At this time the European position can only be “you’re out” because we can not afford more external conditioning of states that do not believe in Europe progression. After that, England is very close to us, they have 5 thousand transposed European standards, 53 FTAs in common and equal standards. And this fact will be taken into account.
Minister for Europe proposes a revival of investment. The Italian measures go in the same direction?
I have said that from my point of view the next stability law will have to have its own center investments in all sectors. We have a theme of very significant productivity to work on. In my area of responsibility we are to look at what we’re doing with priority to investment in technology and machinery, and will strengthen stability in what has worked best.
Think superammortamento 140%?
Let’s say that it is an example that you can do. Accelerated amortization further, let’s call iperammortamento on investment for digital: it would be a measure also in the key of Industry 4.0.
The decree competitiveness has slipped or permanently gone?
I have since September as deadline for submission of the business plan of the ministry with things to do in ‘arc of a time horizon ordered, and there will also be the work he is doing Enrico Bondi on the cancellation of the incentives that have not worked. Stability is the container for action on superammortamento and tax credit for research and to insert the measures of the plan 4.0 Industry will present by July. But there may be other measures can be anticipated and we are thinking with the economic control room of Palazzo Chigi and the Ministry of Economy on when and whether to do it. Meanwhile arrive on new loans to businesses.
What is it?
Already in July we will launch the reform of the Central Guarantee Fund, to make it more oriented investments in working capital. Also gradueremo shells with a intermediate rating model does not make sense to cover everything at 80%, it is more effective to increase the level of guarantees, where there is a more exposed or difficult situation.
© All rights reserved
No comments:
Post a Comment