October 31, 2006

Research and Global Competition

Global competition is accelerating the growth in Research and Development investment by 7% per year. Research is an absolute necessity for the survival of companies.
The International R&D Scoreboard, that each year looks at the top 1,250 world companies for investment has classified the top 50 companies for research spending. Only one company from Italy is there: Finmeccanica at the 50th position.
Italy is not present among the top 10 world nations for research and development. It is overtaken by the United States, Japan, Germany and even South Korea, Switzerland and Finland.
It’s a given fact that the companies that invest in research, manage to grow and increase their market share. This is not happening in our country for many reasons.
Among these are the lack of mechanisms provided by the State to give incentives to companies to invest; the inability to keep young researchers in Italy as they prefer to emigrate because of the lack of conditions favourable to their professional development; the destination of dividends to shareholders in a disproportionate way rather than to research and development as for example has been happening for years in Telecom Italia.
These are all urgent topics to be tackled by the Government to set the economy going again.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 29, 2006

Restoring the Public Accounts to Good Health

The sacrifices that Italian citizens are being asked to make with the Finance Law have been dictated by the need to save the country from bankruptcy. The Centre Right Government has left us with a growing public debt, a fall in industrial production, the reduction of employment levels, and the deficit in the Balance of Payments.
Berlusconi e Tremonti have gifted us with the collapse of the public accounts. This is the truth, and is visible to all. A truth that would be much more evident if an opposition party didn’t have 3 TV channels and an unlimited number of newspapers.
A situation that is unique in the world and one that is obviously undemocratic. The cheek of the Centre Right blaming Italy’s problems on a manoeuvre that is instead trying to save Italy is intolerable.
That leaders of the Centre Right are offering to save the country with a government done toghether is similarly intolerable. They have shown themselves to be incapable and are now claiming to be able to teach us something. If they want they can do that, but from the opposition benches for the next five years.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 27, 2006

Utility Bills and Profits

Most of the companies that provide primary services have growth in turnover, in profits and in dividends distributed to the shareholders. In the Mediobanca classification the following appear among the top ten: Eni(1), Enel(2), Telecom Italia(3) and Autostrade(5). Companies providing energy, electricity, connectivity, manage motorway connections in a substantial position of monopoly.
If these companies record high profits and the citizen suffers constant increases then something isn’t working. If tariffs, fixed costs, toll charges have the aim of distributing rich dividends to the shareholders, and not the development of the nation the Authorities have the right and the duty to intervene.
The essential services can be a stimulus to the development of the companies in competitive markets or they can cause distortions in the case of monopolies without real controls. Italy is today positioned in this second situation. The relaunch of the economy starts from services that are competitive in Europe in terms of quality and prices.
Furthermore, the pockets of citizens cannot be used to distribute dividends to shareholders by means of essential services. I find this profoundly immoral.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 25, 2006

The Debts of the State

photo from lastampa.it

A man has committed suicide in front of Turin’s Palace of Justice. He was called Rocco Agostino, and he was the head of 2 ACI car pounds holding about 5,000 cars for la Prefettura, il Tribunale e la Procura {bodies in the justice system}.
He committed suicide as a protest against the delay in making payments that, according to him, had been due to him for a long time. An inquiry will provide clarity about the basis of his claim, but there is no doubt that there are frequent delays in the reimbursements and payments that the State is due to make to private citizens and to companies.
The fight against tax dodging should be accompanied by a serious and solid intervention to give timeframes that are fixed and fair for tax reimbursements and for payments for the activities carried out for the public administration.
Delayed payments to companies can create difficult situations, delays in investments, reductions in employment, sometimes even bringing about the closure of the company. In relation to private individuals and companies, this generates mistrust of the State as well as causing economic difficulties that can be serious.
The competitiveness of the companies and the credibility of the State depend on the respect of social pacts and reciprocal treatment. The State must give an example.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 23, 2006

The bankruptcy of the Comune di Taranto

The services of our every day lives depend on local institutions: roads, nurseries, public transport, refuse collection and disposal. The local council of a city shouldn’t be allowed to go bankrupt in the midst of indifference.
And yet that is what has happened at Taranto. A few days ago, the Commissario straordinario {official given charge of the situation}, Tommaso Blonda, approved the definitive management report on the 2005 financial situation of the Comune di Taranto.
In 2004, the deficit was more than 83 million Euro. In 2005 it increased by 60% to about 138 million. The debts not included in the balance sheet were in the region of 150 million. The latent liabilities are almost 160 million. Overall the deficit is almost 450 million. Euro.
The ten days of financial autonomy guaranteed by the Commissario have gone by. The coffers are empty and public services have started to be cut. It is unacceptable that the citizens one more time, have to pay for people that consider the public realm to be their zone of conquest.
It is correct that local entities are given responsibility with autonomy to make decisions and raise revenue through taxes, but it is in the same measure right that the administrations give an account of their actions right to the end.
An important city that goes bankrupt is a symptom of the collapse of the public administration, but also of the inefficiency of the control bodies and of the political parties. It is a bad signal that must make us reflect.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Society
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 21, 2006

The abolition of the Provinces

The restoration of the public accounts to good health depends on two factors: revenues and expenditure. Yesterday I tackled the first point, the one about revenues, with a proposal for the fight against tax evasion which, it is worth remembering, costs us 200,000,000,000 Euro in unpaid taxes each year.
The second point is the reduction in the costs of the Public Administration and its greater efficiency. The savings can be gained straight away, through many actions that Italia dei Valori will try to get put into effect with specific proposals for laws.
The first is the abolition of the Provinces, often holders of votes for the parties and nothing more, as well as the grouping together of tiny Comuni {towns and villages} at least so that they have 5,000 inhabitants. Today out of a total of 8,101 Comuni there are 5,835 with less than 5,000 inhabitants, most of which are in Piedmont and Lombardy.
The current structure of State-Region-Province-Comune with the addition of the Comunità Montane {Mountain Communities} is costly and awkward and so is slow in making decisions that are important for the citizens. The competences of the Provinces can be handed over to other bodies. The excessive splitting up of the Comuni does not allow for a coordinated policy for the territory and it multiplies the costs of mayors, town or village councillors, Cabinet members, employees and even of the public buildings.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 20, 2006

The Finance law and tax evasion

The Finance law is an intervention of necessary re-equilibrium. The previous government, the one that today takes to the streets and the roundabouts, lived on promises and getting the State into debt. There was the absolute necessity to avoid fundamental economic parameters, like the rate of inflation and the public debt, from ending up out of control.
The main cause that is endemic to this umpteenth sacrifice is tax evasion, that is quantified as 200,000,000,000 Euro per year. A monstrous figure without comparison in western countries. There are provinces and sectors where tax evasion is more than 50% and even more than the declared income base.
Public services, health, transport, schools are based on taxes from citizens. In the Constitution it is clearly written that everyone must do their bit based on their capacity to contribute. Those who don’t contribute, the so-called “crafty” ones, are in fact thieves, and they are the main cause of the increase in costs of social services and of taxation. Those who already pay taxes are thus wronged twice.
There is a simple and immediate way to get the tax dodging revealed. It would be enough to deduct from the income base, the costs paid. The tax dodgers would no longer have a reason to exist and a big chunk of the tax dodging would be recovered. A widespread system of complicity would thus fall.
If citizens could already deduct their expenditure, the Finance law would have been able to strengthen the social services and invest in infrastructure without asking citizens for even one euro, in fact reducing taxes. Why has this never been done if it is so simple?
The answer is that tax dodgers vote and as always have a big representation in Parliament. The fight against tax dodging cannot be put off. It’s not simply an issue of social justice, but of the very survival of the State.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 18, 2006

Clarity on Autostrade-Abertis

I’m publishing an interview that I gave today to La Stampa.

ADP: Green light? If it’s a matter of a merger between 2 private companies, namely Autostrade and Abertis, the traffic lights are neither green nor red, the traffic lights are just not there.
What is different however is the discussion about the concession, as the Minister for Infrastructure, Antonio di Pietro, speaking on the telephone, explains.

LaStampa: Minister, between declarations and press releases there’s a bit of confusion. What is the situation today according to you?

ADP: If we refer to the declarations made by Prodi in Madrid, the President of the Council has simply repeated something that we have said from the beginning: there’s no obstacle to the operation, given that a government cannot put an obstacle in the path of a decision made by 2 private entities. They are free to do commercial and financial operations that they believe to be appropriate, and the government has no grounds to intervene. It can simply take note of the event.

LaStampa: The question of the concession, however…

ADP: If we are referring to the concession, understood as an administrative authorization, faced with the transformation to a different body, controlled by a different entity, to a new point of reference, the Council of State has made known that once a merger has happened there cannot be an automatic transfer.
The judges have in fact said very clearly that the Minister of Infrastructure, and the Minister of the Economy have the duty to carry out an evaluation regarding the legitimacy and the merits. As regards the legitimacy, the prohibition for construction companies to take part in the merger has been superceded by the decree that brought in a ceiling of 5% for them at the time that the administrators are nominated, but allowing them free to buy shares when and if they want to.

LaStampa: However the Minister Bonino in Brussels yesterday said even this obstacle will be removed.

ADP: For the moment the decree stands. It could be modified if Parliament so wishes or if the European Commission requests that if this positive modification that we have brought in to overcome the prohibition against construction companies should turn out to be insufficient.

LaStampa: And if even this threshold were to be removed?

ADP: For my Ministry, it would have absolutely no influence as the evaluation as regards the merits remains valid. For me this is not to be separated from the whole procedure and it remains in all its complexity and completeness that has to be examined. This includes the consideration of the interests of the State and whether the concession passes or not to a foreign entity.

LaStampa: Is this why you have told Anas that Autostrade could reformulate the request for authorization?

ADP: We did that the day following the approval of the decree that removed the prohibition to the presence of construction companies in the social capital of the new group.

LaStampa: Basically, it’s possible to say there is a green light to the merger but not to the transfer of the concession?

ADP: The green light to the merger was there from the beginning, as no-one could really place traffic lights there.
The traffic lights for the transfer of the concession, however, is there: I repeat, it’s necessary to do a thorough evaluation of the merits and the legitimacy. And we can’t take for granted that there won’t be other questions of legitimacy that could emerge. The partners must present a new application and according to what they propose to us or what they re-propose, we will evaluate the situation. I would like to point out that up until now, we have not received any proposal and thus it seems very strange to me that there is this presumption, this continuous pressure on the Ministry to concede a concession that has not been requested.

LaStampa: Have you always been convinced that all the concessions should have a thorough overhaul?

ADP: It’s not simply a question relating to Autostrade spa, but the issue relates to all 22 of the companies managing motorways. In fact we find ourselves with a situation that has shown everyone its limits and its irrationalities, because as it is currently formulated, the system does not guarantee the tax payer and it does not guarantee the consumer, the safety, the competition in the sector and the certainty of the investments. It does not even guarantee the transparency of the verification activity.
In fact, up until now, I haven’t managed to find a single control mechanism either inside the Ministry or inside Anas that relates to respecting the concession pacts.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 17, 2006

On your side

It’s 6 months since the elections and it’s time to do an initial assessment of how Italia dei Valori has participated in the activities of Government.
I haven’t always been in agreement with the allies of l’Unione and this has been clearly shown many times as in the case of the Pardon law, the Justice law and even, a situation that is current right now, the transfer of the motorway concessions from Autostrade to Autostrade-Abertis.
Even though there have been situations which are really critical, Italia dei Valori has not considered withdrawing its support from the Government because, with all its limits, this is the best Government possible at the moment.
The alternative is Berlusconi and the final break up of Italy. We have found public accounts out of control, promises in the place of great engineering work, public companies like Alitalia on the edge of collapse, widespread “precariousness”.
Simply the sense of responsibility in relation to the country, just that and nothing else, has made Italia dei Valori in certain cases, vote in favour of the coalition. That doesn’t mean that we haven’t given energetic prominence to our reasoning, that I believe matches with the reasoning not only of those who voted for us, but also of the majority of Italians.
Our statements, even though they haven’t won the day, have anyway allowed the citizens to understand what has really been in discussion, so that they could form their own opinions about the facts and about the laws. Italia dei Valori is against messy dealing, and this is why it is paying the price of marginalisation from the politics and from the power games. Some see this as a weakness, but I believe that it is our strength.
Always on the side of the citizens.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Politics
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 14, 2006

Rights of citizens and of Concessionaires

I’ve had a single objective from the moment I became a Minister: to serve the country and its citizens. The dispute that is ongoing with the Autostrade company and in general with the motorway concessionaires is fruit of a wish to define rules that protect the rights of Italians.
The ambiguous silence of the other parties concerning this national issue, about primary infrastructures for the development of the country is demeaning. Behind the concessionaires there are very powerful lobbies.
Their interests don’t seem to coincide with those of Italian citizens, but they can in fact match with those of some parties.

L’Espresso has published an interview with Marco Ponti, Professor of Economics and Transport and one of the most important European experts.
It is an interview in which he criticizes some of my positions but it clearly expresses the following concepts:
- “extraordinary profits are made without great increases in efficiency”
- “(the system) is too unbalanced in favour of the concessionaires and does little to protect the users from the gains made by the monopoly”
- “(what we have seen so far has little to do with a price cap) because in fact it doesn’t give back to the users the excess profits that the regulated body accumulates”
- “we have a system that does not satisfy the needs of viability nor the efficiency of the concessionaires”
- “(investments over long distances) there are no advantages to entrust them to private companies because the industrial content is too thin”
- “(in relation to the tariffs) the system should be changed to face up to the defects of the excess profits that haven’t been given back, the investments that have not been done and so on”

This is a reality visible to the eyes of every car driver.

From the beginning of the Autostrade-Abertis situation, the main discussion areas have been on finance, mergers, and Stock Exchange.
There has been no or not enough discussion about the protection of the rights of citizens, of the fairness of the concessionaire-State relationship, of the policy of developing the infrastructure in connection with the territory. There has been much discussion about money, and about groups that already are earning a lot and would like to earn even more.
For these people, the problem is that the motorways belong to the State, not to the concessionaires. The substance is not the market, but good management. This is the only criteria I intend to use to judge the work of the concessionaires.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Economy
Commenti (1) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 13, 2006

The Reform of the TV sector

I share in the commitment of the Minister Paolo Gentiloni who wants to break the monopoly of the advertising and TV market.
The Council of Ministers has accepted the amendments presented by Italia dei Valori to modify the draft decree carrying the name of Gentiloni. Today there was a follow up to what the Constitutional Court had already pointed out in the past, thus there is the obligation to transfer the broadcasting channels in excess of the second network. The obligation comes into effect in 90 days from the publication of the law.
With the release of the third channel keeping an autonomous TV will be guaranteed. And the rights acquired by third parties will be safeguarded, as for example Europa 7. The fragmentation of the frequencies has been avoided. This would have prevented breaking up the current duopoly in the TV market and would have destroyed the expectations of commercial operators (recognised even at a judicial level) .
The approval of our proposal relating to the audience ratings is of equal importance. This avoids a conflict of interests between those who carry out this activity and the operators in the sector. For this reason, it will not be permitted that a company connected with TV or radio broadcasting can be part of a company connected with the activity of Auditel {monitoring audiences}.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 12, 2006

Le Iene and the Privacy Tsar

I’m publishing a letter by the Honourable Massimo Donadi, the leader of Italia dei Valori in the Lower House. It’s addressed to the Privacy Tsar and relates to the suspension of the programme Le Iene.

"We invite the Privacy Tsar to reconsider his action.
It would be appropriate if the broadcast of the programme “Le Iene” were to be permitted, because, if it is true that the data was stolen from the relevant people without their knowledge, it is also true that anonymity is also guaranteed, neither more nor less than in similar programmes often shown in the satirical programme on Italia Uno.
We don’t want to think that we use one yardstick for parliamentarians and a different one for other citizens. In fact, specifically the politicians, who have a public role that is based on mass communications, have less occasion than others to call for the protection of their own privacy.
And don’t say, with great hypocrisy that it is necessary to protect the image and the authority of Parliament. Because the dignity of Parliament is defended with acts and with laws approved by them and anyway the information resulting from this pseudo-investigation is already in the public domain, in fact even more so than if the broadcast of the programme had been allowed to go ahead."

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 10, 2006

Schema 28

Schema 28 and its lawyers, rather than threaten the government, should read more carefully the motivation of the decision by Tar of Lazio that was published just 2 days ago.
Reading this judgement could give them more insight. I'm referring to the ordered evaluation of the price cap with reference to the missing investments.
I would point out that the TAR of Lazio has ruled against a company that is controlled by ASPI itself for having wrongly and arbitrarily applied the tariffs and also for not having carried out the planned investments as laid down in the agreements.
I will repeat for the umpteenth time that the government and as far as I'm concerned the Ministry of Infrastructure does not intend in any way to touch the structuring of companies, including the possibility of mergers.
However it is time that the investments are made and that the tariffs are set in the public interest for the consumers and the tax payers.
I would in fact encourage an accurate reading of the judgement of Lazio's TAR which repeats that the concession is not a private contract that can be handled in complete autonomy, but that it implies public obligations in the interests of the people, and the company must keep to these obligations.
It is the duty of the Government and of my Ministry to ensure that the law is respected. I keep to the laws and I am not frightened by the threatening tone of the Schema 28 note.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 06, 2006

The failure to revoke the Castelli law

Clemente Mastella's justice law has achieved the vote.
This provides the proof that the polemics of recent days about the failure to get the law approved because of the abstention by the Italia dei Valori senators was instrumental and inconsistent. They simply didn't want to reveal the intrigues between the majority and the opposition.
During the election campaign, the Unione said that the Castelli law had to be revoked as it was unconstitutional. That's a promise and unfortunately it's not the only one that hasn't been kept. It was a promise that could have been kept easily.
With the votes of Italia dei Valori in the Senate, there would have been the majority necessary to revoke the Castelli law. Instead they preferred to go with a nasty agreement with the CDL rather than keep their word with their own voters. Italia dei Valori will not bring down the government out of a sense of responsibility towards the country, but it asks for equal dignity in relation to the other parties in the Government.
Italia dei Valori is the fourth largest party in the coalition. Its voice cannot be ignored nor undervalued. Exactly like that of the country.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (2) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 05, 2006

Voting on Justice

I’m publishing the interview that I gave today to the daily paper La Stampa.

La Stampa: Mastella says ‘mi sono rotto i coglioni di Di Pietro’, {I’ve had enough of Di Pietro}. What does Di Pietro say?
ADP: Look, I’m just back from Mugello, where I attended a meeting as Minister of Infrastructure, and already this points out the low level of education of those who attack me. I wasn’t even in Rome. Obviously I accept the responsibility for what has been decided by the Italia dei Valori parliamentarians. But why attack me rather than criticising them?
In this way, Mastella is considering them to be puppets. He is showing a lack of respect to the three of them and not just to myself. Then the phrasing, the bad words. I don’t intend to descend to a personal level. Each person can use his own language.

La Stampa: You use your own way of speaking, then.
ADP: I find Mastella humanly pleasing. I think his personality is pleasing as he speaks in a concise way and uses dialect. He has the courage to say things that many others are thinking but are not saying.
However I don’t intend to reply in the same way in which he deals with us from Italia dei Valori, that is with tit for tat and childish things.

La Stampa: He was really angry. He said that for him politics is science and unlike you all he doesn’t do ‘ambushes’ or ‘blackmail’.
ADP: But what blackmail and ambush! Not just the words that often fly out without control but they can be shrugged off. I believe that Mastella’s approach is offensive.
In the Senate there are people with autonomy who vote with their heart and with their head. Certainly, I share their choices and I accept all the responsibility. But to think that they are puppets in my hands is ungenerous towards them.

La Stampa: You will at least have known what they were doing, won’t you?
ADP: As I said, I was in Bologna dealing with Infrastructure. Certainly I was made aware of an umpteenth episode of purposeful negligence towards ourselves…

La Stampa: Let’s say that they didn’t allow you to flow in the government and you made them pay.
ADP: They didn’t allow us to flow but we don’t want to make anyone pay. We simply want to expose a problem and to try to change a text a little.

La Stampa: Like that however, the first result that you get is to let the right win, though you say that you are against them far more than you are against Mastella. By abstaining you gave a big blow not only to a law that you don’t like but also to the majority. Don’t you agree?
ADP: But the blow is not final! And above all anyway, to get the approval for the law on the abolition of the Castelli reform, the route taken has been support from far and wide without in any way risking the fall of the majority.
Then we have always voted respecting the constraints of the coalition. And I announce even now that in the final vote we will do exactly that. However this was not the final vote. Above all we have always voted “yes” apart from for article 5. Do you want to know why we did this?

La Stampa: Given that it is not as Mastella thinks to be contrary to some person.
ADP: We have done it because in Italia dei Valori’s manifesto, it is written that we will try to change the Castelli reform. However this law that we are discussing is however the fruit of a low compromise with the majority government: so much a kilo to you, so much a kilo to me…
And in spite of this, up until now we have always screwed up our noses, expressing disagreement in all the ministerial sites, but ignored. Now however, enough of treating us like the ugly duckling. The one who is blackmailing is Mastella, not us.
I don’t understand why, when faced with an abstention that is only this – the request to continue discussions a bit more, and to even listen to our thoughts, - the Minister of Justice gets on his high horse so much. We have always respected the coalition and we will continue to do so. But at least that we can discuss and change the text a bit in Parliament. Otherwise what are we here to do?

La Stampa: They say that you and Clemente can’t stand each other, partly because neither of you can take off the clothes you have worn in the past. You as the judge and he as the Christian Democrat who was investigated in the Tangentopoli investigation and coming out absolved from all the inquiries.
ADP: I swear I like Mastella. When he came to Vasto to our celebration we even had the chance to share some laughs together. However he owes us the political respect for Italia dei Valori.

La Stampa: What will happen now? Mastella says: Di Pietro must clarify or resign.
ADP: Resign? I’m certainly not considering it… The truth is that by abstaining we have asked for an act of humility and not one of arrogance and a demonstration of power. We asked this of the Minister of Justice and of the whole government.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (1) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

October 04, 2006

Financing the Parties

The recent TV programme called Report by Milena Gabanelli dealt with the financing of parties by companies. The programme dealt with the financing during the election campaign coming from those companies that hold State concessions.

Here we have activity that is technically legal, but to be condemned from the point of view of ethics, morality and common sense. The concessionaire companies get concessions from the State and at the same time provide finance to the parties making up the government.
In the case of motorway concessionaires the financing comes from the tolls paid by the citizens. Basically, the motorway tolls paid by citizens are financing the parties through the concessionaires that operate with hardly any business risks.
The Autostrade company {running the motorways} has given massive sums to many parties. Italia dei Valori immediately gave back the ‘donation’ of 20.000 €. Other parties haven’t done the same. That’s their choice even though I don’t have the same viewpoint.
In fact I don’t think that it is appropriate that a State concessionaire should pay money to the parties using money from the citizens so that they can get possible favours.
Let them instead reduce the tariffs.

This list shows the amounts parties received from Autostrade in 2006:

Alleanza Nazionale 150,000 €
Comitati per Prodi 150,000 €
Margherita 150,000 €
DS 150,000 €
Forza Italia 150,000 €
Lega Nord 150,000 €
Udeur 50,000 €
UDC 150,000 €

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Information
Commenti (2) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa