SCENARI – IL MIO DISCORSO OGGI AL PE A UN CONVEGNO DEI CONSERVATORI SU RIFORME ISTITUZIONALI EUROPEE E RUOLO DEI PARLAMENTI NAZIONALI
NO AL MINISTRO DELLE FINANZE UNICO, SI’ A UN MECCANISMO DI OPT-OUT A FAVORE DEI PARLAMENTI NAZIONALI.
“CARTELLINO ROSSO” PER LE NORME UE CHE NON CI PIACCIONO. LO FA LA GERMANIA CON LA SUA CORTE COSTITUZIONALE, PERCHE’ GLI ALTRI SI PRECLUDONO QUESTA POSSIBILITA’?
Ecco l’intervento che terrò oggi a Bruxelles al convegno “National Parliaments as a cornerstone of the European democracy” organizzato dal Working Group on Institutional Reform del Gruppo Ecr dei Conservatori e Riformisti europei
We live in a world in which the key-concept is “complexity”. We are witnessing the crisis of the “simple explanation” of things.
So, for example, on the one hand, we believe in nationhood: and we consider a political and a cultural mistake every attempt to wipe out that dimension. But, on the other hand, we know very well that the dimension of “nation States” can’t include and solve all problems. Transnational phenomena call for a new approach.
And this is true when we have to cope with tragic challenges (from terrorism to immigration, for example), and even when we have to face ordinary problems (how to boost our economy). In both cases, you cannot act as if you were living in an inward-looking club.
Of course, we need some guide-lines to come to terms with this reality.
I think that we have three alternatives to consider.
The first alternative. Rigid homogeneity or free competition? In Europe, the “ayatollahs” of federalism, for example, think that they can move beyond differences and impose a single solution, a unique solution, identical for everyone. But it’s like providing two men, a very fat man and a very thin man, with two suits of the same size! On the contrary, I believe in competition, in a free competition between models: to verify which model (which fiscal model, which legal model, and so on) performs better.
The second alternative. Do we need another institutional tools or do we need a stronger political will to achieve our purposes? I stand for the second option. In general, we are witnessing a deep crisis of the major international institutions (from the United Nations to the European Union, to quote a couple of examples). So, it wouldn’t be wise, in my opinion, to create other institutional devices. The best thing is to regain the political will and the political courage (inside and outside the existing institutions) to support our ideas of freedom, democracy, open markets, and so on.
The third alternative. Do we have to allow that the decision-making table is a table of unelected bureaucrats, or do we have to change this trend, and to restore a full political responsibility (and of course, of full political accountability)? In my opinion, not only in the European Union, but even at the United Nations, bureaucrats have gained too much ground. We have to restore a clear political role.
The European challenge that we are going to face in the next months offers a very clear example of what I am trying to say.
We shouldn’t allow a “super-State” project, a Franco-German project designed in Berlin, in Paris and in Brussels, and then imposed to all of us. I think that we should shift to a “multi-speed Union”, in which the States can partecipate in the programmes which suits them, and abstain from the programmes which don’t suit them.
It would be a good example of free cooperation, and a serious step towards a sustainable integration.
In particular, we are all deeply interested in what will happen tomorrow in the United Kingdom, on the 23rd of June.
But, if I were, as I am, a European friend and admirer of the Uk, I would be even more interested in what may follow on the day after tomorrow, on the 24th of June.
As far as I’m concerned, both sides are expressing valid and competing views, and Britain is showing once again how a proper democracy must work. On the one hand, the Leave camp points out (and they might be right) that only the radical shock of a Brexit might help the Eu itself to turn over a new leaf; on the other hand, the Remain camp says (and they may be right too) that only staying at the European decision-making tables will enable the Uk to have real leadership to change the Eu, or at least to prevent further damages.
There is good reason to be genuinely torn. And – to be honest – no one can make predictions on the Eu reaction after the British referendum. In any case, the British electors are wise enough to decide on their own.
My point is: whatever the result of the referendum is, it is absolutely essential that, on the 24th of June, the British leadership should keep together all those who, across Europe, are against the Eu status quo.
We need a network of countries and political movements (the Ecr Group at the European Parliament, and the Aecr as a family of parties and movements can lead that process) united on three main points:
- push for a multi-speed/multi-tier European union in which members can join in or abstain from programmes that suit or don’t suit them
- prevent a euro-area Finance Secretary, with the mission of “harmonising”, that is to say building the “final cage”. On the contrary, we need fiscal competition between Staes and territories.
- pass a sort of sovereignty bill in as many European countries as possible, stating that EU rules may prevail, unless they are overturned by national Parliaments (or repealed by Constitutional Courts, as it happens in Germany). The best thing would be that national Parliaments should be given a general opt-out option on what comes from Brussels.
That’s why, in my opinion, whatever the result of the 23rd of June is, we need a strong and inspiring British leadership to have a second and stronger European renegotiation process. It’s not a question of institutional tools, but of political will and courage. The Eu cannot be an end in itself: it should be a means by which we can achieve our purposes of democracy, free market, full respect for the taxpayers.
Italian MP – Italian Conservatives and Reformists
Guido Gentili su Il Sole 24 Ore spiega cve il referendum inglese (Brexit o no) rappresenta un’ultima chiamata anche per i politici italiani sull’Europa
Giuditta è una gattina buonissima, ma ogni tanto graffia. Nel tempo libero, essendo una micia British, è disponibile a dare ripetizioni di inglese al Primo Ministro italiano e ai suoi amici (etruschi e non).
La frase di oggi è: “to have a bee in one’s bonnet”
Per dire che uno è fissato con qualcosa, gli inglesi usano un’immagine assolutamente fantasiosa: dicono che uno ha un’ape sul berretto…Esempio: Renzi has a bee in his bonnet about territorial banks…
E’ possibile seguirmi su Facebook cliccando “mi piace” su www.facebook.com/Capezzone
Chi non desideri più ricevere questa newsletter può inviare una mail a firstname.lastname@example.org