Adesso un altro paese dell’Unione Europea ha un governo formato da forze politiche che non condividono in nulla, ma proprio in nulla, l’ideologia e le conseguenti idee politiche ed economiche di Mr Juncker e sodali.
In altri tempi, quando si stava peggio, si mandavano i telegrammi di complimenti ed auguri, almeno formalmente.
Ma Mr Juncker, che si atteggiava a democratico quando si riteneva essere vincente, adesso non sopporta l’idea che l’Elettorato gli abbia voltato le spalle: non lo vota più.
Poi, un bel giorno, si dovrà pur tenere un Consiglio Europeo.
Tutto il livore di Juncker è esternato in queste frasi, che riportiamo virgolettate.
«Italians have to take care of the poor regions of Italy. That means more work; less corruption; seriousness»
«We will help them as we always did. But don’t play this game of loading with responsibility the EU. A country is a country, a nation is a nation»
«Countries first, Europe second»
«I have full confidence in the genius of the Italian people»
«We are there to serve them, not to lecture them» [Tusk]
* * * * * * *
Egregio Mr Juncker, nessuno si illude che questo nuovo governo abbia vita facile. Eredita una situazione drammaticamente critica dai pregressi governi europeisti di sinistra e sa più che bene che nulla sarà intentato per metterlo in difficoltà.
Sappiamo solo, però, che questo governo Le toglierà persino la voglia di continuare a bere il vino dell’Unione Europea.
European commission president says Italy’s problems can’t all be blamed on the EU.
Jean-Claude Juncker has said Italians need to work harder, be less corrupt and stop looking to the EU to rescue the country’s poor regions, in comments unlikely to ease the fraught political battle over Italy’s future relationship with Brussels.
Days after the Italian president, Sergio Mattarella, defended Italy’s place in the eurozone against the country’s populist leaders, the president of the European commission said he was in “deep love” with “bella Italia”, but could not accept that all the country’s problems should be blamed on the EU or the commission.
“Italians have to take care of the poor regions of Italy. That means more work; less corruption; seriousness,” Juncker said. “We will help them as we always did. But don’t play this game of loading with responsibility the EU. A country is a country, a nation is a nation. Countries first, Europe second.”
Officials in Brussels and markets around the world are awaiting the outcome of ongoing talks between Italy’s two populist leaders, Luigi Di Maio of the Five Star Movement (M5S) and Matteo Salvini of the far-right League, on forming a new government.
After making the remarks during a question and answer session in Brussels, Juncker added it would be best to be “silent and prudent and cautious” this week, whenever he was asked about Italy. “I have full confidence in the genius of the Italian people,” he said.
Talks between Di Maio and Salvini have revived hopes that Italy might stave off a snap election, a prospect that shook Italian markets this week because of fears that a new poll might bolster populist and anti-euro forces in the country.
Juncker’s comments are likely to be met with scorn among some in Italy, as officials including Mattarella have sought to allay growing feelings of animosity towards Brussels and doubts about the benefits of inclusion in the eurozone.
Mattarella vetoed a proposal to appoint a vehemently anti-euro economist, Paolo Savona, to serve as finance minister. The move was deeply controversial and was initially met with calls for his impeachment, but Mattarella sought to justify his decision with a rousing defence of Italy’s role in the eurozone, and spoke of the importance of sending the right signals to the markets.
His move was praised by European leaders, and it prompted Donald Tusk, president of the European council, to admonish a German budget commissioner who had suggested that a collapse in the markets might teach Italians not to vote for populists. “We are there to serve them, not to lecture them,” Tusk said in response to Günther Oettinger’s remarks.
Italian press reports have indicated that any agreement to form a new government involving the League, formerly known as the Northern League, and M5S would include the nomination – again – of Giuseppe Conte, a formerly obscure law professor, to serve as prime minister.
But Di Maio and Salvini are expected to back down on their earlier insistence that Savona should serve as finance minister.
There were also small indications that the populists would try to assure the markets they were not planning any big moves to hasten an Italian exit from the euro.
In Milan, a roadside sign outside the headquarters of the League that had previously declared “Basta Euro!” – a call to leave the currency – was painted over overnight.
Mattarella, who would have to formally approve the new government’s leader and slate of ministers, signalled on Wednesday evening that he was ready to install a technocratic government if a deal could not be reached, but decided to give Di Maio and Salvini more time to draw up a list of ministers that could be accepted by all parties.
The decision to “slow things down” – taken three months after an election that resulted in a hung parliament – was an attempt to try to head off a snap election, which would have to be held if the political impasse lasts much longer.
A bitter row between Mattarella and the two populists at the weekend had prompted the latter to step back – at least temporarily – from their plan to assume power.
On Sunday night, Mattarella refused to endorse the nomination of Savona for the finance brief, setting off a chain of events that caused turmoil on Italian markets: Conte resigned as prime minister-in-waiting and new elections appeared to be imminent, worrying markets and officials in Brussels. Their concern was that new elections could strengthen populist gains in Italy, leading to even greater uncertainty about the country’s future in the eurozone.
Those fears were slightly allayed on Wednesday after Di Maio opened the door to new talks with Salvini, and suggested he was open to reaching a compromise that could satisfy Mattarella’s objections.
«Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy is likely to be forced out of office after a key party said it would support a motion of no confidence against him»
«The no-confidence vote is scheduled to take place on Friday and was tabled by the opposition Socialist party»
«Socialist leader Pedro Sánchez needs a majority of 176 votes to become leader»
«The Basque Nationalist Party (PNV) says it will support the motion, which may then propel Mr Sánchez into office»
«The party holds a crucial five seats in parliament»
Nelle elezioni tenutesi il 26 giugno 2016 il partito Popolare di Mariano Rajoy prese il 33.01% dei voti, cui corrispondono 137 / 350 deputati. Il parito Socialista Operaio Spagnolo il 22.63%, 85 deputati, i Podemos il 31.15%, 71 deputati ed i Ciudadanos 13.06%, 32 deputati. Il Partito Nazionalista Basco aveva preso l’1.19% dei voti, ossi cinque deputati.
Dopo una incredibile stasi di oltre un anno, alla fine Mr Rajoy ottenne la fiducia con l’astensione benevola di alcuni socialisti. Un governo minoritario, estremamente fragile, fortemente voluto e sorretto dalla dirigenza dell’Unione Europea.
Poi sono accaduti i fatti della Catalogna, che tutti conoscono. Se Mr Rajoy ottenne che la Spagna rimanesse unita, fu tuttavia una vittoria di cui fare volentieri a meno.
Secondo le ultime prospezioni elettorali della IMOP/El Confidencial, al 28 maggio il Partito Popolare era quotato 19.6%, il Partito Socialista 20.6%, i Ciudadanos 28.4% ed i Podemos 19.7%.
Il tempo di Mr Rajoy sembrerebbe essere finito.
L’elettorato spagnolo si è dimostrato estremamente mobile, basti pensare al crollo dei popolari, dal 33.01% al 19.6%, oppure la risalita dei Ciudadanos dal 13.06% all’attuale 28.4%.
Domani votando la sfiducia a quanto sembrerebbe saranno determinanti cinque deputati cinque del partito basco. Se Mr Rajoy si dimettesse, si andrebbe alle elezioni, in caso contrario gli subentrerebbe il leader socialista.
Il caso Rajoy dovrebbe insegnare alcune lezioni:
– I governi alla fine sono eletti dagli Elettori.
– Ci si può opporre anche ad oltranza alla volontà popolare, ma alla fine arriva sempre il redde rationem.
– L’Unione Europea avrà in questo modo seduta nel Consiglio Europeo una persona differente da Mr Rajoy: Mr Juncker, Mr Tusk e Frau Merkel ne tireranno le conseguenze.
Il problema può essere visto nella sua enorme complessità oppure nella sua semplice struttura: due punti di vista egualmente validi, ma finalizzati a differenti scopi.
Da quasi due decenni in Occidente è incorso la devoluzione dell’ideologia liberal e, di conseguenza, socialista. Questo fenomeno è evidente dai risultati elettorali, specie poi quelli degli ultimi due anni.
Occorrerebbe però fare una grande attenzione a non confondere le cause con gli effetti.
Queste ideologie stanno crollando sotto il peso delle loro contraddizioni interne: non riescono a comprendere le realtà emergenti, propongono soluzioni obsolete e quindi inconsistenti, mentre la situazione continua a sfuggir loro di mano.
Per meglio spiegarci, consideriamo questa fatidica frase di Hegel:
«se i fatti contraddicono la teoria, tanto peggio per i fatti».
Ma alla fine la realtà travolge, e porta i sistemi alla implosione. Proprio come successe a suo tempo per l’Unione Sovietica. Ma la storia ai più serve al massimo per riconoscere che è stato fatto un errore già vissuto.
Si apre quindi un periodo storico turbolento. Il vecchio non vuol cedere un passo ed il nuovo non ha ancora acquisito la forza necessaria per imporsi: sono i periodi più bui della storia. Né ci si illuda che a ribaltamento terminato le cose siano immediatamente facili: se è vero che nel maggio 1945 i cannoni finalmente tacquero, ci volle molto tempo perché si potessero vedere i frutti di una pacifica riedificazione.
La grande tentazione cui liberal e socialisti sembrerebbero non saper resistere consiste nel confondere le cause che hanno generato il ‘populismo’ in Occidente con il ‘populismo’ stesso.
Imputano ai populisti vittorie elettorali che li stanno emarginando dallo scenario politico, mentre invece è l’Elettorato che li ha abbandonati. I ‘populisti’ stanno soltanto occupando gli spazi che essi hanno abbandonato.
Uno sguardo alla tabella in cimosa è eloquente. I socialisti tedeschi della Spd, che in passato raggiunsero il 40% dei suffragi, nelle elezioni del 24 settembre 2017 conseguirono il 20.5% ed ad oggi sono quotati 16.5%. Giusto un solo punto percentuale sopra AfD, che si è conquistata un 15.5% senza far nulla: aspetta soltanto che gli errori dei liberal diano i loro frutti elettorali. E verosimilmente, continuando codesto trend, a breve AfD sarà il secondo partito tedesco.
Liberal e socialisti ideologici hanno fatto dell’Unione Europea vista come stato e della loro visione etica una sorta di religione di stato, in accordo alla quale chiunque non la pensasse come loro vorrebbero sarebbe solo ed esclusivamente un eretico, da bruciare sul rogo.
Per loro l’avversario politico è il nemico incombente, da demonizzare per sostenere il morale alle truppe, da temere per una sua vittoria segnerebbe la loro morte politica.
Ma questa posizione mentale altro non fa che portare mulino proprio alle forze che temono.
In Germania il 17.1% della popolazione vive in povertà, percentuale che si innalza al 69.1% nei disoccupati.
Ma Destatis, l’Istituto di statistica tedesco, è ancor più crudele. Se in Germania sono classificati come ‘occupati‘ 44.432 milioni di persone, solo 32.732 milioni di esse sono soggette ai contributi sociali. Dodici milioni hanno Miniarbeit o lavori saltuari: serve un coraggio leonino per cercare di gabellarli come “occupati“.
Ebbe, ci sarebbe forse da stupirsi che l’Spd stia perdendo consensi e che Alternative für Deutschland stia crescendo giorno dopo giorno?
Senza far nulla per risolvere codesti problemi AfD arriverà al governo: qualcuno alla fine dovrà ben occuparsi anche della povera gente. Povera, sicuramente, ma che costituisce larga fetta dell’Elettorato.
* * * * * * *
Chiediamoci adesso per quale motivo lo Spiegel, portavoce dei liberal socialisti, sia così preoccupato per il nuovo governo italiano.
«Two populist parties are set to take over the government reins in Italy and about the only thing they seem to agree on is their desire to spend huge amounts of money»
«Rome Opens Its Gates to the Modern Barbarians» [Financial Times]
«That’s bad news for Italian finances and terrible news for the eurozone»
Già. Parole profetiche.
I barbari sono quelli che fecero cadere l’Impero Romano e resero schiavi i latini prima dominanti. E non ebbero per nulla la mano leggera: forse che non ci si ricordano le storie di Ammiano Marcellino?
Sicuramente notizie cattive per l’Italia, ma altrettanto sicuramente “terrible news for the eurozone“.
Allo Spiegel non interessa un bel nulla l’Italia: i suoi articolisti pensano soltanto a salvare la loro miserabile pelle: ben conoscono la fine che fecero i giacobini.
Two populist parties are set to take over the government reins in Italy and about the only thing they seem to agree on is their desire to spend huge amounts of money. That’s bad news for Italian finances and terrible news for the eurozone.
Signor Fabio doesn’t think it will take long. The new Italian government, he believes, is destined for a brief tenure: “In September, we will be voting again,” says the slender man in the center of Rome. Signor Fabio is the giornalaio — or newsstand proprietor — with the most attractive kiosk location in the capital, situated as it is fewer than 100 meters from the prime minister’s office. He knows what’s going on in the world and that people are once again looking to his homeland with concern.
“Rome Opens Its Gates to the Modern Barbarians,” was the headline chosen by the Financial Times 10 days ago in an editorial about the new government, which pairs the Five Star Movement (M5S) under the leadership of Luigi Di Maio with the right-wing nationalist party Lega, led by Matteo Salvini. But Italian papers weren’t any less critical. The daily Il Manifesto went with the headline “Populandia,” in reference to the populist natures of the two parties. “The Third Republic Is Formed as the Whole World Laughs,” wrote Il Foglio. And Libero wrote: “Mattarella Chooses the Rotten Apple: Mini-Premier Conte.”
The latter is a reference to Salvini’s and Di Maio’s inability to agree on which of the two should become prime minister, so they chose the completely inexperienced law professor Giuseppe Conte. While he is closely connected to the Five Star Movement, Conte has never held public office — and now he is being asked to lead Europe’s third largest economy, with a population of 60 million people.
This government, the 67th in the last 70 years, is perhaps the most unusual and least experienced of them all. At the top are two populists who are critical of the EU and friendly to Russia, two coalition partners who share few joint political goals and whose supporters hate each other. The one party, Lega, draws the majority of its support from the wealthy north while the other, M5S, has its roots in the comparatively poor south.
“It’s like if Germany were governed by Sahra Wagenknecht (from the Left Party) and Alexander Gauland (from the right-wing populist Alternative for Germany),” says Markus Ferber, vice-chair of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs in European Parliament and a member of German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s Christian Democrats.
Making the Problems Worse
The difference being, of course, that Italy holds 2.3 trillion euros in sovereign debt, the equivalent of 132 percent of its gross domestic product — a debt ratio that is only exceeded within the EU by Greece. In addition, the country is still suffering from the consequences of the financial crisis, including high unemployment, particularly among young people, and it is struggling to deal with the strain of the thousands of migrants who are still streaming across the Mediterranean to Italy.
The country has been among the EU’s problem children for years. As such, the election victory by the populists is hardly surprising, rather it is the logical consequence of the problems facing the country. But at the same time, it has the potential to make those problems much worse.
To satisfy the desires of their vastly different constituencies, Salvini and Di Maio included tax cuts, a minimum basic income and the retraction of the recently passed pension reform in their coalition agreement. According to the calculations of Carlo Cottarelli, a former director of the Fiscal Affairs Department, these measures will cost at least 109 billion euros per year.
Jörg Krämer, chief economist at Germany’s Commerzbank, warns that if the new government pushes through its proposals, the country’s budget deficit, which currently stands at 2.3 percent of GDP, would spike to fully 7 percent.
The two parties refer to their coalition agreement as the “Contract for the Government of Change,” but in actuality, it is a blueprint for destroying state finances. And the consequences for Europe will be impossible to ignore. “The eurozone is threatened by a new crisis,” says Clemens Fuest of the Center for Economic Studies in Munich.
Concern is particularly high in Brussels, but officials there are avoiding direct criticism for the time being, likely in the hope that things won’t ultimately turn out as bad as expected. At an economics conference on Thursday, European Commission Vice President Valdis Dombrovski was asked if the new government’s program would comply with the Stability and Growth Pact, one of several questions about Italy. The Latvian looked visibly uncomfortable before finally replying: No, probably not. He added that he is particularly worried about rising risk premiums on the bond markets, a trend that has also affected other weaker eurozone member states. The prospect of countries not acting responsibly when it comes to fiscal policy has consequences, he said. It is important that all member states adhere to the rules that have been agreed to if they are part of the common currency area, he added.
French Economics and Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire is more direct. “If the new government takes the risk of not respecting its commitments on debt and the deficit … the financial stability of the eurozone will be threatened,” he told French broadcaster CNEWS last Sunday.
Indeed, even if the EU and the euro might have been able to withstand Grexit, an Italian departure from the common currency zone would likely be its death knell. Italy’s economic output is almost 10 times higher than that of Greece. “Given its systemic importance, the Italian economy is a source of potential spillovers to the rest of the euro area,” the EU warns in its most recent set of country-specific recommendations released on Wednesday of this week.
The recommendations, which are issued at regular intervals, recognize the efforts thus far undertaken by Italy to reduce its debt levels, but those efforts were all the product of the previous government. The new powers-that-be in Rome have left no doubt that they intend to focus their attentions elsewhere.
EU laws, says Lega head Salvini, will only be respected in the future if they are beneficial to Italy. And Di Maio of the Five Star Movement adds: “Starting now, the Italians come first and only then the negotiations about the deficit and EU rules.”
That approach is consistent with the intention to appoint 81-year-old economics professor Paolo Savona as economics and finance minister, a man who is considered a fierce critic of the euro. Savona’s new book, “Like a Nightmare, Like a Dream,” will soon be hitting the shelves. In it, he writes: “The euro is a straightjacket produced in Germany.” Berlin, he continues, “hasn’t changed its view of its role in Europe since the Nazi era.” Membership in the common currency area, Savona writes, “involves fascism without dictatorship and, from an economic perspective, a form of Nazism without militarism.”
One wonders whether the aging academic from Sardinia will repeat his verbose criticisms when he sits down with his German counterpart Olaf Scholz at the next European Union summit.
Di Maio’s people, of course, are doing their best to assuage fears of megalomaniacal populists driving Italy, a founding member of the EU, over a cliff. “We are in constant contact with the U.S and German embassies and we value complete transparency,” says one of Di Maio’s closest confidantes.
But such words are cold comfort. The advance of the populists, after all, is coming at a difficult time for the EU. The block is still enjoying solid economic growth, but a potential trade war with the United States is looming and the consequences of Brexit must likewise be overcome. A rekindling of the European trench political warfare that accompanied efforts to save Greece would be devastating.
Exactly that, though, appears to be on the horizon.
In the French elections one year ago, the feared victory of extremist, anti-Europeans did not come to pass. But right-wing populists are nevertheless on the march. They are the most powerful opposition party in Germany, they are part of the government in Austria and now they have joined the Italian government. “Our allies,” said Marine Le Pen, the head of the French right-wing party Front National, “are laying the groundwork for the great comeback of nation-states.”
Italy will “become the leader of Europe’s populist, anti-establishment movement,” says Steve Bannon, Donald Trump’s former chief strategist, who is expected in Rome on Sunday. It marks the first time that Brussels will have to contend with an anti-system government in one of the EU’s founding countries. Bannon is excited about the triumph of Di Maio and Salvini, who are demanding that sanctions against Russia be wound down. “It’s very important for these guys to be very aggressive about confronting Brussels,” Bannon told the Washington Post this week.
Such an approach would almost certainly be popular in the country, where only 39 percent of Italians view the EU positively — not a good sign in what was once the most pro-EU country in the block. Part of the country’s frustrations with Brussels stems from the feeling of having been left alone to deal with the Mediterranean migrant crisis. In addition, many voters who have suffered from years of recession see the warnings from Brussels as heavy-handedness.
Part 2: A Potential Return of the Euro Crisis.
The fact that Italians, who traditionally have a high rate of savings, stand to suffer significant losses should the country withdraw from the eurozone is something neither M5S or Lega have addressed. The parties have also remained silent about the European Central Bank strategy — pursued by its Italian president, Mario Draghi — of buying hundreds of millions of euros worth of Italian sovereign bonds to prop up the country’s economy. On the contrary: an early draft of the coalition agreement demands that the ECB forgive 250 billion euros of debt.
“Fantapolitica,” is the term that reasonable Italians have adopted to refer to such demands: “fantasy politics.”
As it currently stands, Italy requires 200 billion euros of fresh borrowing each year to service old debts, says Klaus Regling, head of the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), the eurozone’s bailout fund. The fund has immediate access to 400 billion euros, meaning it could finance Italy for two years if need be. But only if no other eurozone country falls victim to the turbulence such a crisis would no doubt trigger.
But exactly that scenario is what has many people concerned, with pressure on Spain and Portugal likely to increase. The two countries have, to be sure, made progress in cleaning up their state finances, but they are still vulnerable, and their debt loads remain high.
Even if the Italians don’t proactively cease servicing their debts, they could still face trouble. Credit rating agencies already hold a dim view of Italy. Were they to downgrade Italy two additional levels, Italian bonds would reach junk status, meaning that many investment funds would be forced by their own regulations to dump them.
If mistrust and interest rates rise, Italian banks could once again find themselves in a dire situation. In the last 12 months, they have managed to reduce their risk exposure, but they are still sitting on billions of euros in bad loans. If the new government chooses to ignore these risks, the situation could rapidly spiral out of control.
Already, the interest rate difference between Italian and German sovereign bonds — the so-called risk premium — has risen significantly. In recent weeks, it has climbed by almost an entire percentage point. The difference reflects the higher risk of default for Italian bonds. Investors are only prepared to loan more money to Italy if they receive higher interest rates for their troubles.
Bailing Out Italy
Back in February, hedge funds already began speculating on falling European stock prices on the assumption that an anti-EU government in Rome could fragment the currency union. Bridgewater Associates, one of the largest sharks in the tank, placed a $22 billion bet against European stocks. The most recent wave of Italian sovereign bond sales was also likely driven by hedge fund speculation.
There is significant concern in many European capitals that the Conte government might operate under the assumption that Italy is too large and important for Europe to allow it to slide into bankruptcy and that European institutions would ultimately jump in to bail the country out. After all, roughly a third of Italy’s sovereign debt is held by foreign investors — a total of almost 800 billion euros. If a 50 percent debt haircut came to pass, as was done in the case of Greece, banks, insurance companies and pension funds would be forced to forego claims to 400 billion euros.
“The economic situation in the country has been highly explosive at least since the 2008 financial crisis,” says Henrik Enderlein, an economist at the Hertie School of Governance and an advisor to the German government. “But now a government is coming to power that is like a burning match and which could result in the situation getting out of control.”
The only thing left is to hope that this government of post-ideologists and right-wing populists will ultimately see the light — just as Alexis Tsipras did not long ago in Greece. “Leaving the common currency would be the worst-case scenario for Italy,” Enderlein warns. The country would sink into economic insignificance, he says, not unlike Argentina after its 2001 collapse.
European hopes are primarily focused on one person: Italian President Sergio Mattarella. “He will make sure that the new government adheres to European rules,” says a Brussels diplomat.
For most of the last three months, the 76-year-old lawyer has been patiently seeking to enable the assembly of a stable government and avoid new elections. And there is nothing he has left untried. He even held a face-to-face with Silvio Berlusconi, the man who paved the way for the rise of the populists and who led Italy into the crisis. Finally, though, the current coalition took shape, even if it looked for a time as though it was hopeless.
But even if Mattarella can prevent the worst — by refusing to sign certain laws, for example — he cannot prevent the political uncertainty from blocking a central EU reform project, that of reforming the economic and currency union.
Currently, Europe is waiting for the German response to French President Emmanuel Macron’s proposals, which he delivered eight months ago in a speech at the Sorbonne. Macron would like to see a joint eurozone budget and a common deposit insurance regime, among several other ideas.
Spending Even More
“The current developments in Rome are the death blow to Macron’s reform agenda,” says Commerzbank chief economist Krämer. Every step toward the collectivization of risk or debt, he says, “would be an open invitation for Italy to spend even more.”
Even if Macron is now carefully choosing his words and repeatedly saying he respects “the decision of the Italian people,” developments in Italy are, in fact, a significant setback for him and his reform proposals. He is caught between a Berlin that cannot seem to make up its mind and a Rome that is deeply skeptical of the EU. Realizing a vision of a unified, strong Europe won’t be easy with partners like that.
Concern is growing in the Élysée Palace in Paris that Europe is facing its next significant crisis and Macron, instead of pushing through his reform plans, will be forced to spend his time on damage control, not unlike his predecessors. “Salvini and Di Maio won’t achieve anything for Italy, but they will be in a position to completely block Europe,” says one of Macron’s advisers. The term “crazy,” the adviser says, would be a polite way of describing the new Italian government’s program.
The concerns are justified, particularly given the enormous resistance against Macron’s reform plans that already exists in German parliament. One element of those plans that is controversial is the “common backstop” envisioned as part of the banking union. The banking union envisions shareholders and creditors initially being made liable in the event of a bank collapse. Now, though, the use of the backstop — public money — is under discussion for extreme cases in which the costs of winding up a failed bank cannot otherwise be covered.
German politicians and others who oppose Macron’s vision fear that savings account holders could ultimately be made to pay for financial institution bankruptcies in countries like Italy. This fear has not been reduced by the anti-European rhetoric currently coming out of Rome. Indeed, the situation in Italy is not a good omen for the EU summit at the end of June, where heads of state and government intend to discuss a deepening of the eurozone.
Yet despite all of the justified concerns, it is also true that the coalition in Rome hasn’t actually entered office yet. The alliance with the aggressively anti-immigration party Lega is a controversial one within the Five Star Movement. “We have lost a few supporters along the way,” admits a spokesman for Di Maio. Furthermore, their parliamentary majority is just 30 seats. That isn’t much in a lawmaking body in which 206 representatives changed parties in just the last legislative session.
And should the new government suffer a premature demise — a fate which, Silvio Berlusconi insisted last week at the European People’s Party summit in Sofia, is one he would certainly hate to see — then the former Italian prime minister, now 81 years old, has a couple of thoughts on what should happen next.
In a good mood due to the recent decision by an Italian court to lift the ban on him holding public office, Berlusconi said he would be happy to do all it took to prevent a state crisis in Italy. And he would of course be prepared to “take on responsibility.”
Per comprendere appieno questo editoriale di Bloomberg sarebbe utile richiamare alla mente le ultime parole dette dal prof. Krugman, Premio Nobel per l’Economia e portavoce per i problemi economici dei liberal democratici americani.
«Faith in the single currency trumps democracy? Really? European institutions already suffering lack of legitimacy due to democratic deficit. This will make things much worse»
«This is really awful: you don’t have to like the populist parties who won a clear electoral mandate to be appalled at the attempt to exclude them from power because they want a eurosceptic finance minister»
Due i concetti base:
– “European institutions already suffering lack of legitimacy due to democratic deficit“. L’Unione Europea è illegittima perché non è democratica;
– “Faith in the single currency trumps democracy“. I sostenitori di questa Europa e di questa eurodirigenza vivono le loro credenze a livello di credo religioso. Credo vissuto in modo così totale ed intenso da permettere che uccida la democrazia. Questo è il giudizio del prof. Krugman.
«Italy’s pro-euro elites have overreached disastrously. President Sergio Mattarella has asserted the extraordinary precedent that no political movement or constellation of parties can ever take power if they challenge the orthodoxy of monetary union.
He has inadvertently framed events as a battle between the Italian people and an eternal ‘casta’ with foreign loyalties, playing straight into the hands of the insurgent Five Star ‘Grillini’ and anti-euro Lega nationalists. He unwisely invoked the spectre of financial markets to justify his veto of euroscepticism. Taken together, his actions have made matters infinitely worse.»
Il Telegraph usa termini inequivocabilmente precisi: Mattarella ha fatto un colpo di stato.
* * * * * * * *
«The EU needs to show flexibility and restraint»
«The crisis in Italy is also a crisis for the European Union.»
«The populist parties that won the last Italian election, and that hope to do even better next time, are united in little except blaming the EU for Italy’s setbacks»
«Up to now, the European Central Bank has stayed prudently quiet, but Italy’s bond yields have surged, and there are signs of contagion in Portugal, Greece and Spain»
«While it’s true that the EU’s rules on fiscal consolidation and ECB support should be exercised flexibly, and that the budget rules in particular need to be improved, they can’t be simply tossed aside, as the populists demand, without undermining the financial integrity of the entire European project»
«Rather than lecture — or surrender — EU leaders should acknowledge their failure on refugees»
«Membership in the euro system is what keeps Italian interest rates low enough to support the country’s enormous debts»
* * * * * * * *
Bloomberg riporta cose ragionevoli in un’ottica che stentiamo a poter condividere.
Se è vero che la permanenza nell’eurozona ha concesso all’Italia un lungo periodo di tassi bassi, periodo peraltro sprecato dai precedenti governi, è altrettanto vero che poco o nulla ha fatto per obbligare l’Italia a contenere il proprio debito delle pubbliche amministrazioni. Quasi che indetificassero nel debito il mezzo per tenere in punto l’Italia.
Non solo. L’Unione Europea negli ultimi anni si è voluta presentare come primizia degli Stati Uniti di Europa, retti dall’attuale dirigenza liberal, esulando fortemente dall’alveo economico per imporre una sua vision e etica e sociale, anche essa vissuta a livello di credo religioso. L’articolista lo ammette solo in piccola parte, quando afferma:
«EU leaders should acknowledge their failure on refugees».
Ma non basta chiedere scusa: mettano anche mano al portafogli.
«While the German credit market’s claims on the Eurozone decreased by 17 per cent between 2009 and 2012, the decline was even more drastic in the PIGS countries, which amounted to 281 billion USD in 2012.»
«In late 2010, German bank exposures in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, and Spain – the PIGS countries – amounted to around 513 billion USD. Germany’s claims were far greater than those of France (409 billion USD) and Italy (76 billion USD)»
«Second, whereas European solidarity is steadily drifting away, German Euroscepticism is set to rise. Germany long lacked the fertile ground necessary for Euroscepticism, but the Eurozone crisis has equipped it with the necessary tools. The ‘Alternative for Germany’ (AfD) was founded in 2013 in protest of the Eurozone bailout of Greece. With nearly 13 percent of the vote, Germany’s right-wing AfD party is now the third-largest and biggest opposition force in the ‘Bundestag’. The AfD not only wants Germany to leave the Eurozone (or alternatively, for weak southern Eurozone countries like Italy, Spain, and Portugal to ‘be kicked out’ in order to save the currency) but also rejects all forms of Eurozone governance, especially financial transfers. More domestic opposition to Merkel’s Eurozone policy will further limit the government’s leeway in the negotiations for Eurozone reforms and thus pose stronger restrictions to ‘benevolent’ leadership»
* * * * * * *
I problemi sono molti e complessi: gli slogan sono controproducenti e fuorvianti. Anche i tentativi di esposizione sintetica corrono il rischio di essere semplicistici.
Una cosa emerge però in modo vistoso.
Tutti si stanno scalmanando a parlare, chi in ben chi in male, dell’Unione Europea, dell’eurozona, della Banca Centrale, dell’euro e, per finire, della presenza dei ‘populisti’.
Sembrerebbe che nessuno abbia il coraggio di chiedersi perché mai questa Unione Europea si stia disgregando, perché mai i ‘populisti’ siano cresciuti prepotentemente fino a diventare forze di governo.
The crisis in Italy is also a crisis for the European Union. The populist parties that won the last Italian election, and that hope to do even better next time, are united in little except blaming the EU for Italy’s setbacks. They’re wrong about this, and now Europe must be careful not to play into their hands.
The immediate political turmoil is no closer to resolution. Carlo Cottarelli, the premier-designate and former International Monetary Fund official, has been struggling to form a caretaker government. President Sergio Mattarella may soon be forced to dissolve parliament and call snap elections. Whether the next vote comes soon or after an interlude of technocratic rule (all but doomed to fail for lack of support in parliament), Italy’s future in the euro system will be in contention.
This is an argument that Europe needs to win — but winning will require a demanding mixture of flexibility and restraint.
On Tuesday Guenther Oettinger, a German EU commissioner, told an interviewer: “My concerns and expectations are that the coming weeks will show that developments in markets, government bonds and Italy’s economy could be so drastically impacted that they serve as a signal to voters not to vote for populists on the right and left.” He was also reported as having said something brisker — that financial markets would teach Italy’s voters a lesson. The Five Star Movement and the League were delighted. Matteo Salvini, head of the League, said: “They are shameless in Brussels.”
Oettinger was right, but unwise to say it. The European Union can’t expect to defeat the coalition in a battle for Italian public opinion — not like this, anyway.
Up to now, the European Central Bank has stayed prudently quiet, but Italy’s bond yields have surged, and there are signs of contagion in Portugal, Greece and Spain. What if the Italian populists campaign on a demand for special, rule-breaking assistance from the central bank? The ECB would feel obliged to say no — and Germany, for one, would insist.
While it’s true that the EU’s rules on fiscal consolidation and ECB support should be exercised flexibly, and that the budget rules in particular need to be improved, they can’t be simply tossed aside, as the populists demand, without undermining the financial integrity of the entire European project.
At the same time, the EU ought to recognize that one of Italy’s biggest grievances is legitimate: The union’s handling of the refugee crisis has been lamentable. Its partners left Italy largely alone to deal with what should have been treated as a European problem. Italy should get more support for the costs of rescuing and processing migrants, and asylum seekers should be distributed more fairly across the EU. Had this been done earlier, the Italian election might have gone differently.
Rather than lecture — or surrender — EU leaders should acknowledge their failure on refugees, then remind Italy that it is a valued member of the euro system, that it benefits enormously as a result, and that membership confers both rights and obligations.
Italians will have to work out for themselves what’s at stake in their future with the EU. In the last election, the populists didn’t dare to explicitly propose quitting the euro system — and with reason, because such a course would be disastrous for Italy’s economy. Membership in the euro system is what keeps Italian interest rates low enough to support the country’s enormous debts. Fiscal control would be far harder, and far more urgent, outside the euro system.
This is the case that Italy’s mainstream politicians should be pressing. There’s only so much the EU’s leaders can do to help. Top of the list is denying the populist alliance more opportunities to point fingers in their direction.
I giochi sono completamente aperti e sarebbe azzardato avanzare delle previsioni.
Dopo molte dichiarazioni contrastanti, adesso sembrerebbe che il partito centrista Ciudadanos si rifiuti di sostenere una mozione di sfiducia contro il Primo Ministro Mariano Rajoy.
I voti dei partiti più piccoli potrebbero essere determinanti nel tentativo di porre fine al mandato di sei anni del premier. Ma le intenzioni di voto finora espresse cono conflittuali.
Un’unica cosa parrebbe certa.
La sfiducia a Rajoy renderebbe ancora più instabile questa Unione Europea. Rajoy è persona fidata per Mr Juncker, Mr Tusk e Frau Merkel.
«Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy will face a vote of confidence in his leadership on Friday as corruption convictions handed down to dozens of people linked to his center-right People’s Party (PP) threatened his six-year rule»
«Opposition parties are taking advantage of Rajoy’s weakness after 29 people linked to the PP were convicted last Thursday of crimes including influence-peddling and falsifying accounts, in the culmination of a long-running corruption trial»
«The PP has closed ranks behind Rajoy, who said on Friday he intended to serve out his four-year term and that the corruption convictions did not affect a single member of his government»
«Ciudadanos (Citizens), a liberal party ahead in opinion surveys and the most likely to win a snap election, urged Rajoy on Monday to call an early poll, saying his government was weak and tainted by corruption»
«Ciudadanos said on Saturday it would be willing to work with the Socialists to support a neutral candidate to oust Rajoy, whose minority government has been damaged by a crisis sparked by Catalonia’s independence vote»
«Spain’s centrist Ciudadanos party refuses to support a motion of no-confidence in Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy due this Friday, its leader said on Wednesday, making the votes of smaller parties key in the bid to end the premier’s six-year rule.»
* * * * * * * *
L’Unione Europea si avviando ad avere governi sempre più incerti e traballanti, incapaci di prendere decisioni serie ed impegnative.
Ed il numero di governi eurofili diminuisce con il tempo.
→ Reuters. 2018-05-30. Spanish prime minister to face confidence vote on Friday
Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy will face a vote of confidence in his leadership on Friday as corruption convictions handed down to dozens of people linked to his center-right People’s Party (PP) threatened his six-year rule.
Spain’s parliament agreed on Monday that the debate and vote would take place on Thursday and Friday, although the opposition Socialists who proposed the vote may struggle to garner enough support in the fragmented legislature to unseat Rajoy.
News of the no-confidence vote helped drive the Spanish government’s borrowing costs to 2-1/2 month highs, while the blue-chip stock index, the IBEX, turned lower.
Opposition parties are taking advantage of Rajoy’s weakness after 29 people linked to the PP were convicted last Thursday of crimes including influence-peddling and falsifying accounts, in the culmination of a long-running corruption trial.
The PP has closed ranks behind Rajoy, who said on Friday he intended to serve out his four-year term and that the corruption convictions did not affect a single member of his government. The 63-year-old survived a no-confidence vote last June.
“We are deeply sorry that there were people who used the PP for self-enrichment,” party spokesman Pablo Casado told a news conference on Monday, adding that the no-confidence vote was irresponsible and put Spain’s economic stability at risk.
Spanish borrowing costs relative to Germany’s rocketed to their widest differential since the start of the year, though they were also hit by concerns over political uncertainty in Italy.
PRESSURE FROM OPPOSITION
Ciudadanos (Citizens), a liberal party ahead in opinion surveys and the most likely to win a snap election, urged Rajoy on Monday to call an early poll, saying his government was weak and tainted by corruption.
The Socialists have proposed their leader Pedro Sanchez as a replacement for Rajoy. The party, with just 84 seats in parliament, must get at least 176 votes to carry its proposal.
Leftist party Podemos, with 67 seats, has said it will support the motion, but that would not be sufficient. The Socialists would also have to seek backing from small regional parties who would attach politically difficult conditions in return for their support such as the freedom of Catalan politicians from custody.
Ciudadanos said on Saturday it would be willing to work with the Socialists to support a neutral candidate to oust Rajoy, whose minority government has been damaged by a crisis sparked by Catalonia’s independence vote.
However, Ciudadanos leader Albert Rivera said on Monday he was not prepared to seek pacts with “regional nationalists and populists” to oust Rajoy and that elections in the autumn would be preferable.
Spain’s centrist Ciudadanos party refuses to support a motion of no-confidence in Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy due this Friday, its leader said on Wednesday, making the votes of smaller parties key in the bid to end the premier’s six-year rule.
Spanish political parties are taking advantage of Rajoy’s weak minority party and a court ruling last week that sentenced dozens of people linked to his conservative People’s Party (PP) to decades in prison in a long-running corruption trial.
The no-confidence motion, presented by the main opposition Socialists, needs backing from a fragmented parliament including nationalist parties from the Basque and Catalan regions each with their own agenda.
Ciudadanos would be open to proposing a second motion of no-confidence with an independent candidate and an eye to calling an early election, Albert Rivera said in an interview with COPE radio station. He said the Socialists had turned down this plan.
Rajoy said in parliament on Wednesday he intended to carry out his four-year term without calling an early election. But opposition parties are expected to continue to try to oust him even if Friday’s no-confidence vote fails.
“Even if no successful motion is passed to oust Rajoy, the risk of early elections before the end of the year has increased significantly,” said Antonio Barroso, an analyst at Teneo Intelligence.
“If an early election is held before year-end, a centrist, market-friendly and pro-European government would be the most likely result,” he added.
Socialist leader Pedro Sanchez has put himself forward as the alternative candidate for leader and offered to agree with other parties on a date for fresh elections.
So far, leftist party Podemos, which was founded in 2014 and fed off voter frustration with economic inequality and alleged corruption during a biting recession, has pledged its backing.
Podemos leader Pablo Iglesias, whose party holds 67 seats in parliament, would support the motion of no-confidence, he said in an interview with La Sexta television on Wednesday.
Even so, the joint votes with the Socialists fall short of the minimum 176 votes required to unseat Rajoy.
“If it fails, as of Friday we will get to work on throwing out the PP,” Iglesias added.
Rivera dismissed any partnership with Podemos and the regional parties, branding them “separatists and populists”.
“A strong legitimate government arising from elections will give much more stability to Spain than a ‘Frankenstein government’ with a parliamentary minority,” he said.
The United Stated Census Bureau ha rilasciato l’ultima elaborazione sul reddito mediano degli householders, fornendone anche una interessante mappa a livello continentale.
La si osservi bene, e la si compari quindi con la seguente, relativa ai risultati ottenuti nelle elezioni presidenziali del 2016.
La comparazione di queste due mappe dovrebbe rendere evidente come il partito democratico rappresenti prevalentemente persone a reddito mediano elevato, mentre Mr Trup rappresenti prevalentemente quelle a reddito mediano basso.
Capito questo concetto, la attuale campagna elettorale resta molto più facilmente comprensibile.
Rientra pienamente nella logica democratica che il Parlamento Europeo non accetti il Budget pluriennale proposto dalla Commissione e richieda chiarimenti, approfondimenti, e suggerisca modifiche.
Ciò che lascia invece davvero perplessi sono le motivazioni addotte.
«They use sometimes current prices, sometimes constant prices, sometimes they calculate with 27 countries, sometimes with 28, sometimes put programmes that are out of the EU budget, like development aid»
Ciascuna di queste critiche sarebbe sufficiente a bocciare il piano.
Non dovrebbe servire aver studiato ragioneria dei bilanci constatare l’uso irrazionale di stime a prezzi correnti oppure a prezzi costanti secondo convenienza.
Conteggiare poi ogni tanto un’Europa a 28 ed altre volte un’Europa a 27 paesi stravolge alla radice ogni possibilità di varare un budget attendibile.
Si resta infine molto sorpresi che gli estensori del progetto di budget pluriennale, tutta gente colta ed esperta, sia incorsa in simili errori, che avrebbero comportato la bocciatura all’esame di ragioneria.
Si dovrebbe aggiungere solo un commento.
In tutto l’intero programma non si trova una qualche forma di investimento strutturale, quasi che l’Unione Europea ne fosse ampiamente fornita, né, di conserva, si riscontrano iniziative fattuali per ridurre la disoccupazione.
quando poi è la Commissione stessa a non rispettare nello spirito e nella lettera i Trattati.
→ EU Observer. 2018-05-25. EU budget: Biggest cuts and increases
After weeks of opacity about the European Commission’s original proposal for the next long-term EU budget, the European Parliament has put together its own figures.
They show the differences between the upcoming 2021-2027 period and the previous one from 2014-2020.
The commission has not published comparisons for the two biggest policies – agriculture and cohesion – and MEPs are concerned that the planned cuts are deeper than expected.
MEP Isabelle Thomas, in charge of the budget file in the parliament, told reporters that the commission’s proposal is “a very nice story, but not a true story”.
“They use sometimes current prices, sometimes constant prices, sometimes they calculate with 27 countries, sometimes with 28, sometimes put programmes that are out of the EU budget, like development aid,” she said.
In a document obtained by the EUobserver, the parliament said the commission remained “unclear about which figures it was comparing”.
The commission compares by using current prices, which do not exclude inflation. “This results in presenting its proposed cuts much more favourably,” the parliament says in the document.
Constant prices allow comparison in real terms between two different periods – but the commission did not provide this information in its first proposal in early May.
The parliament has now highlighted the main changes in funding for agriculture, cohesion, research and the Erasmus+ programme.
According to the figures provided by the parliament, the European Solidarity Corps, the Union Civil Protection Mechanism and Erasmus+ are the programs whose fundings increase the most.
The European Commission data has deducted UK expenditure from the 2014-2020 budget to compare with the new EU-27 budget.
The parliament explained that this reduction is “understandable in policy areas on pre-allocated national envelopes,” such as agriculture or fisheries, where it is easier to calculate the UK’s share.
However, the parliament pointed out that this method “may not be fully justified with genuine EU-wide programmes such as research, Erasmus.”
Riportiamo gli ultimi sondaggi elettorali perché sempre più Lettori ce lo richiedono. Nessuno si attenda variazioni ampie nel volgere di pochi giorni: questo, almeno, dal nostro sommesso punto di vista. Segnaliamo soltanto la continua crescita della propensione al voto per la Lega.
Ricordiamo come per questa tipologia di dati e livelli di percentuali siano statisticamente significative variazioni superiori a tre punti percentuali.
Ricordiamo anche come, per il metodo elettorale del Rosatellum, la soglia del 40% sia quella critica per ottenere la maggioranza parlamentare. Ma la sicurezza sarebbe rappresentata almeno dal 42%.
«We trust the Italian president, who has been pointing out to potential governmental coalition partners the rights and duties that go together with membership in the European Union and the Eurozone»
«he thinks financial markets and the state of Italy’s economy will convince voters not to pick left-wing or right-wing populists.»
«Even now, developments on bond markets, the market value of banks, and Italy’s economy in general have darkened noticeably and negatively. That has to do with the possible government formation. I can only hope that this will play a role in the election campaign and send a signal not to hand populists on the right and left any responsibility in government»
* * *
«Italy’s fate “does not lie in the hands of the financial markets,” …. Italy deserves respect» [Jean-Claude Juncker]
«My appeal to all EU institutions: please respect the voters. We are there to serve them, not to lecture them» [Donald Tusk]
«With new elections now likely, the euro and German dominance will become campaign issues while many fear a surge in anti-EU sentiment in Italy.
Italy’s populists, angry at being thwarted in their attempt to form a government, have been quick to assign the blame: It’s all the Germans’ fault. After President Sergio Mattarella vetoed their choice for finance minister and put the country on the path to new elections, the populist parties seemed certain to make Germany’s dominance in Europe a campaign issue ….
We have a basic principle, and according to that only Italians make decisions for Italy, not the Germans ….
A minister the Germans don’t like is exactly the right minister for us. ….
This Germany, rigid only with the others, today is the main obstacle to dialogue with the pro-Europeans of the other countries ….
In Brussels, too, the initial relief at dodging the bullet of a Euro-skeptic finance minister quickly gave way to concern that Mr. Mattarella’s move had fueled anti-European feeling in Italy ….
The growing worry in Brussels, as in Berlin, is that Italian voters would increase their support for the populist parties out of protest against perceived foreign interference»
* * * * * * *
Sinceramente, dobbiamo gratitudine a Mattarella ed ad Öettinger.
«This is really awful: you don’t have to like the populist parties who won a clear electoral mandate to be appalled at the attempt to exclude them from power because they want a eurosceptic finance minister»
«Faith in the single currency trumps democracy? Really? European institutions already suffering lack of legitimacy due to democratic deficit. This will make things much worse»
Il twitter di Krugman ha invaso l’Italia: la migliore delle propagande contro Mattarella, l’Unione Europea e l’eurozona.
E che dire delle simpatiche frasi dette da Herr Öettinger?
Hanno sollevato una levata di scudi contro l’Unione Europea che Di Maio e Salvini mai sarebbero riusciti ad ottenere.
Diciamo che con la intervista di Herr Öettinger Unione Europea e Germania hanno perso molta della residua popolarità che avevano, e che l’elettorato italiano ne terrà il debito conto.
Ovunque leggo, con chiunque parlo, tutti sono indignati del comportamento del Presidente Mattarella e semplicemente imbufaliti delle parole di Herr Öettinger.
Sembrerebbe di essere a Parigi il 13 di luglio.
Quindi, quando alle prossime elezioni M5S e Lega trionferanno, un po’ lo dovranno al sig. Mattarella ed ad Herr Öettinger.
A loro il nostro più sentito ringraziamento: hanno compattato gli italiani contro questa Europa Unita in modo mirabile.
Fare discorsi sereni è sempre stato molto difficile, e lo è ancor di più nei momenti di turbolenze politiche e finanziarie. Però, a nostro parere, ne val sempre la pena.
Il punto critico è l’avere un debito delle pubbliche amministrazioni levitato a 2,302 miliardi di euro, e tutto ciò in un momento storico fortemente avverso.
A questo punto è sterile discussione imputare la colpa a destra o manca: tanto il debito rimane tale e quale.
Il problema può essere semplicemente riassunto in pochissimi punti, tutti molto dolorosi.
– I debiti si pagano. Nessuna illusione. Nessuno sconto.
– Il primo problema italiano consiste nel fatto che entro fine anno dovrà rinnovare 286 miliardi di titoli andati in scadenza: in altre parole, dovrà trovare chi li comperi. E senza fare offerte appetibili si corre il rischio di non trovare acquirenti.
– Senza un clima di fiducia gli acquirenti scappano via a gambe levate. E se nessuno li rinnovasse, il Tesoro dovrebbe rimborsare i detentori, ma non ha nemmeno lontanamente una copertura sufficiente.
– È controproducente strillare che si è schiavi dei creditori: volenti o nolenti il denaro ce lo mettono loro e non sono così sciocchi da allocare una cifra di tale portata senza garanzie concrete. Si noti anche che il problema non è solo quello di questo anno: sarà così per tutti gli anni futuri fino a tanto che i debiti non saranno estinti.
– Il secondo problema italiano consiste nel fatto che a livello mondiale il tasso di remunerazione dei titoli sta salendo sulla scia degli aumenti dei tassi negli Stati Uniti. È nella logica delle cose che chi abbia cifre da investire le allochi ove usufruisce del rendimento migliore e delle garanzie più sicure. Ergo, se si vuole trovare acquirenti si devono mandatoriamente aumentare i tassi di rendimento. E questo è un fenomeno che coinvolge tutta l’eurozona, che poco o nulla fece in passato per prepararsi a questa evenienza.
– Il terzo problema italiano consiste nel fatto che l’epoca in cui si poteva integrare in modo consistente le entrate statali ricorrendo al debito è finita. Piaccia o meno: è finita. Se già un primo passo potrebbe essere il non contrarre nuovi debiti, l’unica cosa ragionevole sarebbe quella di iniziare a ridurre il debito pubblico. Detto in parole diverse, riducendo in modo consistente le uscite statali.
– Il quarto problema italiano consiste nella diffusa credenza che la identificazione ed eliminazione degli sprechi potrebbe risanare la situazione. Sicuramente non esiste sana gestione senza una procedura del genere, ma non ci si faccia illusione di sorta: si risparmierebbero briciolotti. Serve un’opera legislativa di abrogazione di leggi che comportavano spese, con il conseguente licenziamento dei dipendenti pubblici che prima le applicavano.
– Il quinto problema italiano è il mito del posto pubblico inamovibile. Tutta la pregressa ‘austerità‘ è stata pagata dal solo comparto produttivo, subissato di chiusure e licenziamenti, e dai giovani che non riescono a trovare lavoro. I dipendenti delle pubbliche amministrazioni non sono stati toccati, perpetrando così una immane ingiustizia, che non può più a lungo essere tollerata.
– Il sesto problema italiano è il mito del ‘diritto precostituito‘. Anche la nobiltà francese a fine settecento poteva vantare diritti precostituiti. Poi, un bel giorno, venne la rivoluzione e la ghigliottina eliminò in modo definitivo tutti i petitivi. In un naufragio ci si accontenti di aver salvato la pelle: chi sulla scialuppa reclamasse la colazione a letto perché aveva pagato il biglietto di prima classe, di norma viene scaraventato in mare: lui e le sue ubbie.
«Il Tesoro, come da calendario, questa mattina ha collocato 5,5 miliardi di euro di Bot a sei mesi ed è andato così a testare la disponibilità degli investitori a comprare la nostra carta.»
«Visto il contesto molto difficile, il rendimento è stato alzato all’1,213%, vale a dire decisamente più in alto rispetto al -0.40% circa dell’ultima asta di aprile»
«Significa che alle casse dello Stato questa emissione di Bot costerà oltre un punto percentuale in più che si traduce in un maggior esborso per 60 milioni di euro circa»
Si faccia attenzione, molta attenzione. Il figliol prodigo tornò alla casa del padre solo dopo che aveva sperperato tutto il suo capitale in banchetti e prostitute: ridotto alla fame, ridottosi ad invidiare il pastone dato ai maiali quando nessuno gli dava alcunché da mangiare si risolse al gran passo. Cerchiamo di non sperperare quel poco che ancora è rimasto.
I Btp fanno di nuovo paura. Questa mattina sullo spread è di nuovo scattato l’allarme rosso. Il differenziale tra il Btp e il Bund tedesco ha sfondato quota 300 punti base per poi rientrare di nuovo sotto questo livello. La volatilità è molto alta e si potranno vedere nuove oscillazioni nell’arco della giornata.
È l’effetto delle forti vendite sul nostro debito da parte degli operatori per il timore di una deriva populista dell’Italia.
Segnali preoccupanti sono arrivati anche dal primo appuntamento vero e proprio con il mercato. Il Tesoro, come da calendario, questa mattina ha collocato 5,5 miliardi di euro di Bot a sei mesi ed è andato così a testare la disponibilità degli investitori a comprare la nostra carta. Visto il contesto molto difficile, il rendimento è stato alzato all’1,213%, vale a dire decisamente più in alto rispetto al -0,40% circa dell’ultima asta di aprile. Significa che alle casse dello Stato questa emissione di Bot costerà oltre un punto percentuale in più che si traduce in un maggior esborso per 60 milioni di euro circa.
Domani è attesa un’altra tornata con il Tesoro che emetterà Btp a cinque e 10 anni per un ammontare massimo di 4 miliardi (la forchetta minima è di due miliardi). Molto probabilmente, anche in questo caso, si andrà su un rendimento molto più elevato di quello dell’ultima volta. Le scorse emissioni, del 27 aprile, erano state collocate allo 0,56% per il Btp a cinque anni e all’1,70% per il dieci anni.
«La volatilità è estrema in queste ore – dice Vincenzo Longo di Ig -. Il rendimento potrà cambiare anche di molto, sia in una direzione, sia nell’altra. A tratti, questa mattina, sono emerse operazioni da “panic selling”, in genere guidate dagli investitori esteri».
Intanto le quotazioni di molte emissioni di Btp sono scese sotto quota 100. Un vero terremoto se si guarda ai prezzi. Per fare un esempio, il Btp Italia con scadenza 11 aprile 2024 e nel portafoglio di molte famiglie a metà giornata scambiava a 92 che significa una perdita in conto capitale dell’8% per chi intende vendere adesso e non va a naturale termine. Per Longo la situazione non è destinata a migliorare nel breve e si protrarrà almeno fino a che non si vedranno degli sviluppi che «piacciono al mercato».
Intanto la tensione ha contagiato anche gli altri Paesi della periferia dell’Europa. Questa mattina il bond decennale del Portogallo è salito al 2,27% dal 2% di ieri. Il Bono spagnolo è cresciuto anch’esso di 11 punti base e si è portato a quota 1,61%. L’euro è in discesa e si muove intorno a 1,1546 sul dollaro.
Ma il costo del nostro debito rimane basso
«Dal punto di vista fiscale, l’aumento dei rendimenti del Btp non preoccupa nel breve periodo – scrive Alessandro Tentori, a capo di AXA Investment Managers Italia -. La lungimirante politica di emissione del Mef (in particolare l’allungamento della vita residua del debito pubblico) contribuisce a mantenere storicamente basso il costo di rifinanziamento governativo, anche in presenza di uno shock di 85bp sul decennale da inizio anno. Nel medio/lungo periodo, invece, i mercati scontano il rischio di una politica fiscale meno allineata con il patto di stabilità e di crescita.
Questo è un fattore decisamente negativo nel contesto di uno stock di debito pubblico a livelli già molto alti. Ovviamente, la recente incertezza politica non aiuta a stabilizzare i mercati. Rimane la questione del tightening implicito delle condizioni monetarie in Italia, questione che Mario Draghi potrebbe dover affrontare durante la riunione del 14 Giugno».