November 28, 2007

Injustice has been done

No formal objection regarding the Court of Cassation Public Prosecutor’s decision to hold a disciplinary hearing against Milan judge Clementina Forleo, Public Prosecutor in the Unipol-Bnl inquiry.

Everything officially correct …just like in the script.

However, it leaves a bad taste in one’s mouth when one realises that, once again, the one that forced to bear the brunt is always, and only, the one that is simply trying to do his/her duty without “keeping an eye peeled” or exhibiting fear or reverence for anyone in particular.
And so, in these rare cases, it happens that an inordinate number of personalities, bodies and institutions move in unison in order to dig up, dissect every spoken and written phrase and inspect every action under the microscope in search of the minute speck, the quibble required in order to justify criticism against the one that, in the end, “must” be shown to be inept and unreliable.
Equally, the final outcome is a foregone conclusion, irrespective of the actual intention of the person that, even in good faith, participates in this exercise in personal demolition. By logical consequence and transient propriety, everything that that courageous judge is doing, or has done (and is therefore questioned), is deemed to be unbelievable and must, therefore, simply be archived.
However, all is not yet lost. Judge Forleo, like Public Prosecutor De Magistris, still have the opportunity to make their voice heard in the institutions (starting with the Upper Council of the Magistrature) and to defend their actions. The aim is to reaffirm the right-duty of every magistrate to motivate his/her provisions in accordance with their conscience and independent conviction and not on the basis of convenience or of the people involved.
In the interests of clarity, therefore, if we were to sift through thousands of judicial provisions regarding ordinary citizens, we would surely find an infinite number of expressions or statements used by the judges, which could raise the same criticisms that are being levelled in the case of Forleo. Nobody, speaking of ordinary citizens, would dream of making accusations against the judges for the expressions used in motivating their provisions. Instead, in this case, as in all of the cases involving the Palace and the High Castes, all the highest powers of the State (starting with Parliament) have sprung into action. With the help of the media, public attention has been cleverly diverted away from the real objective of the investigations, namely the guilt in terms of the web of intrigue that emerged from the tapped telephone conversations and the the judge that wanted to read and assess them, rather than the local clever dicks that were seeking sponsors and protection for their financial escapades.

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

National Railway cuts

Yesterday an article appeared in the Corriere della Sera newspaper, containing my comments regarding the blocking of funding for the National Railways. I stated that I was getting tired of a Government that hands out money willy-nilly while others decide what to do with it.
I have received many letters on-line as regards this issue. I attach one of these below. It is from a citizen that, like many others, would like to see certain changes, is counting on this Government, and must not be disappointed:


“Dear Mr. Di Pietro,
I am an employee of Trenitalia s.p.a, a member of the National Railways Group. I heard about you blockage of the funding, amounting to a total of one billion and 35 million Euro, destined for the National Railways, because you are tired of seeing public money being allocated blindly. Given the facts, I believe that you are completely right in doing so. However, for us employees, this sounds somewhat like a warning bell. What will happen to us? What does the future hold for us? Will we land up going the same way as Alitalia or Autostrade s.p.a?
As regards the funding, it is only right that there be full transparency with regard to hw it is granted, and that the funding be used for useful purposes, such as for example, maintenance on rolling stock and railway lines. In this way we could reduce the delays, a painful ailment afflicting commuters that use the rail service daily to get to their place of work.
The citizens must show display their civic conscience and show some respect for community assets such as trains, stations, etc. Unfortunately this is not always the case. There are numerous cases of vandalism, perpetrated by unmannered thugs that are equally at home carrying out robberies and burglaries.
Personally, every morning when I leave my bicycle at the shelter near the Bologna Centrale station, I am faced with a situation that is pitiful to say the least. There is excrement left behind by the homeless and the drug addicts, syringes and a pervading smell of urine, and the situation is unbearable. Much money is being spent on keeping public areas clean, apparently uselessly because the same filth is present every day.
The money is being spent badly on purchasing useless materials, wastage and useless consumption, while employees are being paid while they are not performing their duties. These are only some of the problems that result in the enormous damage and inefficiency that we are all aware of when talking about the National Railways.
We are informed by the television that the funds are being used to either balance ghost accounts, or to provide incentives for employees’ early retirement with “golden handshake” vouchers. These funds should be used solely and exclusively for the purposes of improving the company’s situation. It is with great regret that I am obliged to admit that the situation within the National Railways was far better when the company was still under the direct State control, with no intermediaries, without Confindustria and without the trade unions, however, as regards privatisation, I see anything but a bright future.
I am sure that you Sir, as a magistrate, have seen it all before on a personal basis and that you can, therefore, understand what I am talking about.
You are one of the few remaining people in Italy that are worthy of our esteem and trust.
Unfortunately we are living in precarious times as regards employment, and who knows whether, in a few years’ time, there will be any such thing as retrenchment benefits, welfare benefits and pensions and, above all, whether I will still retain my job and whether I will be able to set up a family of my own.
The more time passes and the more difficult it becomes to make it to the end of the month, between mortgages, various expenses and the cost of living. We are living in an increasingly uncertain world, with little prospect of a better future.

Kindest regards.
A.M.”

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

November 27, 2007

Government Responsibility

What I am publishing here is an interview I gave the Corriere della Sera for today’s edition.
I am convinced that Prodi will make it this time as well and, in any event, we of the Italia dei Valori party disagree with the attitude of the members of the “rifondazione” parties who are attempting to obtain by force that which they could not obtain by means of a worker referendum.

Corriere della Sera: The last Cabinet meeting revealed a number of signs of dissent.
Antonio di Pietro: «I was there and I found the pullback by a number of colleagues totally unconvincing. It was an orchestration designed to send out a public message. But, thereafter, there was no problem».
Corriere della Sera: But Social Solidarity Minister Paolo Ferrero abstained from the decision to ask for a vote of confidence.
Antonio di Pietro: «At the time, we gave the government our vote of confidence for the manner in which they reached agreement with the social parties, just as we reconfirmed our vote of confidence for the way in which it will be able to respond to the proposals that came from Parliament. Ours is a constructive confidence because, as we are entering the final stages of finalising the Budget, the government has the right and the duty to take the many requirements into account. In the end, irrespective of the gossip and special interests, Prodi will have to accept responsibility for finding the correct balance».
Corriere della Sera: However, Rifondazione is defending the sovereignty of Parliament.
Antonio di Pietro: «It is in everyone’s interest to respect the desires of the Houses. We have given the government a mandate to exercise its confidence so that Parliament can acknowledge the amount of effort that we have expended. And give the go-ahead for the process. No authority whatsoever has been taken away from Parliament».
Corriere della Sera: Which version will be voted on?
Antonio di Pietro: «The version must be the one that has emerged from the agreement reached between the social parties. It may be amended, not distorted mind you, but only subject to prior agreement between the social parties. This is also because we cannot simply trample on the heads of five million workers that voted in favour during the trades union referendum. In any event, the Italia dei Valori party disassociates itself from the blackmailing or high-handed behaviour of other parties».
Corriere della Sera: Are you referring to the Rifondazione party?
Antonio di Pietro: «Yes, but we also want to disassociate ourselves from the demands put forward by individual members of nonexistent parties».
Corriere della Sera: Perhaps the “diniani”?
Antonio di Pietro: «Not only them. There are six or seven senators that are solely representing themselves and they tend to apply a policy of blackmail».
Corriere della Sera: How will this all end, will the new Welfare Bill be approved?
Antonio di Pietro: «I am optimistic and I’m convinced that we will find common ground. However, what will be left is the bitterness regarding the fact that the summary does not represent a form of political mediation, but rather a process of survival. It is, therefore, a lower level point of equilibrium. I would like to advise Prodi not to accept this logic and to rather count on our support».
Corriere della Sera: Justice Minister Clemente Mastella is more rigid. He is aware that if any amendments are made to the text of the original version, a government crisis will be on the cards.
Antonio di Pietro:«We are saying the same thing in this regard. I must reiterate, however, that anything can be changed as long as the social parties agree it to. Therefore, we must all make an effort in order to find a solution».

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

November 26, 2007

International Day for the Elimination of Violence against Women

An appeal to Web surfers: remember this date, 25 November 2007. This is the day that the UN has set aside to remember the battle against violence perpetrated on women. A day of reflection, civil undertaking and a renewed commitment at all levels, including politicians, which affects me as an exponent of the Government, so that this continuing violence being perpetrated on women may cease.
It is useless to pretend that it’s not happening. It is happening, and not only in the third world, where they practice infibulation, but it’s also happening in our own country and in our daily lives. Furthermore, it’s not only happening amongst the so-called illegal immigrants, it’s also happening amongst our own country’s citizens.

This is thus a World Day for reflection and commitment. What is the Italian Government doing to address the problem? I invite you to read everything that you can with regard to what we have set up in terms of legislation, in terms of concrete action and in terms of civic education, so that this violence against women may cease, and so that our country can set the example against the many injustices perpetrated against the women of this world.
Let us read and above all jointly apply these sound principles

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

Council of Ministers: Finance Bill: on its way

Friday 23 November, Council of Ministers. Here’s the account of the Council of Ministers and of CIPE, (the Committee that deals with the approval of public works) and the 150 Years Committee (for the work to be done in relation to 150 years since the Unification of Italy).
We need to think about this as well, but instead of buying flowers, we will do good work by improving infrastructure or buildings that remind us of that date, but at least we will do something that lasts, because if we use flowers, they have wilted by the following day.
As regards CIPE, we had to define the spending of the money coming from the “little treasure”, that of the decree that we approved last week, and we have used the money to show that this time, by spending the money, this won’t go in unspent balances, that is in blocked strong boxes, and above all because we are spending the money early the costs won’t go up and we are spending the money for exactly the things that Parliament has approved, so that then in the future we are not using the money set aside for one thing to spend on another.
It was an important Council of Ministers, not because of what was on the agenda, as much as some methodological issues that we tackled.
On the agenda, we approved the Environmental Code, that was having its second reading and will need more work, then we put right some International treaties, and we also approved regulations for Heavy Goods Vehicles, which is a very sensitive issue about which there are strikes happening, but we found a way forward.
A Council of Ministers that is functioning and is functioning well, contrary to all the polemics in relation to the parties that are filling the newspapers every day. Every day there’s a new one. It’s true, Veltroni has made a new party, even though then he says that there’s a whole process in forming it, but he is making it in his own image and likeness. Berlusconi is making another one in his own image and likeness, he’s giving it a different name, but by inverting the order of the things you add together, you get the same sum. We of the other parties are trying to find a togetherness so that we are not swallowed up at the same time, trying to take forward our political action. While all this is happening however we have a real country with its needs, its worries, its priorities, and on the other hand we have the Council of Ministers, like for example this morning’s that is carrying out its duty, that is governing, because it has received the trust of the citizens and also just now of Parliament, and thus has the duty to govern. Just now, in the sense that the Finance Bill approved by the Senate and the Council of Ministers and the decree approved by both Houses of Parliament say “these are the tools, go ahead, do the work and keep quiet”, and that is what we are doing: working without worrying about the daily political polemics.
What have we decided to do? We have decided to take hold of the product handed to us by the Senate in the Finance Bill, look to see if it has been turned upside down in some way or if it must be tackled serenely by the Council of Ministers in its actions, and we decided not to present hundreds of amendments, but to present them all together after an analysis and some studying. Our commitment is to say to our parties not to fill up Parliament with amendments, or the Finance Bill will be turned upside down, while we are doing the main changes directly as a proposal, as for example, the Class Action, that will have to be approved, because there’s the need for a collective judicial action on the part of individuals to be able to defend themselves against the big powers, because one by one the individuals are always defeated by the colossal powers of industry and the economy. Another example relates to the salary of the State directors, as has been confirmed in Parliament, what has to be confirmed is the idea that they cannot have fabulous salaries, even millions of euro, even to end their contract, but at the same time we need to give more equality and more dignity to the meritocracy, because there are directors who work well and there are directors who should be sent home as soon as possible.
Thus we decided to sift through the various possible amendments to take responsibility, with a single big amendment, covering those issues that it is appropriate to add to improve the Finance Bill in the discussions in Parliament.
All this is happening as a concrete action by the government, while as regards the general situation, we hope that this political scene becomes clearer, starting with a possible electoral situation, so that there can be less discussion of words and formulae, but more of facts and contents. This is where my commitment is directed, here where I am today, and I hope for a long time still, and my commitment as the representative of a party like Italia dei Valori, that is not afraid of the thresholds for the electoral quorum, but wants to have your trust and to deserve it.

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

November 23, 2007

Government and Reforms

The so-called “shove” has failed. The Finance Bill has gone on to the Senate. The Government majority is more solid than before and the Centre Right is clearly in difficulty. It is thus the right moment to finally devote time to the reforms and to keeping promises made to the electorate in 2006. In this light it seems however that the first and only priority of the country is Berlusconi’s do-it-yourself party and the presumed or real sunset on bipolarism. In fact there’s only one priority: to govern well until the natural end of the legislature in 2011. The citizens ask for facts not new acronyms and new names. We have the appropriate numbers for governing and we are not in a pre-election climate. The country is asking to be governed and the rest is chatter and Mediaset.
To have new elections with an electoral system that is tailor-made is the forbidden dream of the one who lost them, but that’s only his problem, not the problem of the Italians.

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

November 22, 2007

An electoral law for the citizens

The last Council of Ministers saw the start of a series of discussions about electoral law. We of Italia dei Valori also had discussions with Veltroni on this topic.
I have to say straight away: the meeting of Italia dei Valori with the Partito Democratico and with Veltroni in particular, did not satisfy us. I hope that future meetings go better.
Practically they said: “Dissolve your party and get lost. We are here to pick up any bones that are left.” We believe that we have an electoral base that will go on voting for us as they see that they cannot be satisfied with the Partito Democratico, just as they cannot be satisfied with other parties.
We want to give strong support to the reduction of the number of parties, so thus we are putting ourselves under discussion. We want to overcome the threshold of the little parties so that we can get to a position of being a party that can represent its voters in Parliament. Thus we want an electoral law that allows us to participate with our party and that doesn’t allow anyone to win before the game starts. Let’s leave these tricks to those that know how to play them, but above all, we cannot accept that people who have their own electorate of quality and proven success, can step outside of the political arena.
In this way, Italia dei Valori is committed and will be committed in the next few months to work for an electoral law that will be both a law that guarantees the rights of the citizens to choose their own candidate, the duty of the coalition to choose beforehand who will be the President of the Council and above all what coalition he is part of. Playing hands-free and then making agreements with "Jane and John" after the elections is a crafty manoevre that is no good for the electorate.

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

November 21, 2007

Council of Ministers. The Accounts of the State Railways

Meeting of the Council of Ministers on Friday 16 November. A Council of Ministers a bit below par, the type that follows the approval of the Finance Law in the Senate. There was the calm of those who had brought home an important result.
A year and a half ago the electorate gave us a Parliament with only 2 or 3 extra votes in the Senate. We’ve got the same now as we had then, so the situation in the Senate has not had a dramatic fall, it’s exactly what it was at the beginning of this term of office. At the beginning of this term of office, instead of saying “We will not be able to govern”, we took on the responsibility to govern.
To tell you the truth, going beyond the chattering: to approve the finance law without having recourse to a vote of confidence, but voting on one amendment after another, and getting it approved with this majority, is an act of responsibility and of maturity. Whether we like it or not, the Government and the coalition of the Centre Left has scored an important point.
I’m saying this even with a sense of pride, because we of Italia dei Valori certainly would have liked something extra, to do more, but when you are in a coalition, then, in the end, you have to do a synthesis and take on the responsibility to govern instead of always putting a spoke in the wheels of those who want to govern.
Thus it was a great gesture of responsibility by the whole coalition, and we found how to square the circle with a finance law that re-launches development and solidarity.

There’s always someone who complains, certainly, we would like to have our cake and eat it, but with public balance sheets in such a disgraceful situation after decades and decades of the First Republic that has reduced them to a sieve, we couldn’t do more than that.
Today we have sorted out public accounting and we have re-launched development.
Obviously we have also approved important draft laws. The most important is surely the draft law taken forward by Minister Turco in relation to the reform of the health system.
It is a draft law of the previous Parliament, but it has another look at the whole system of health services according to a rule by which health care becomes a universal right to which everyone has the right, including those who do have the economic means and those who don’t. It clears up an important point.
Let’s say the truth here as well: for the last few years the private health services have been winning in relation to public services. Thus, those who have money and get private care have a greater advantage over those who don’t have the money and have to go to the public service. They are at an advantage because they arrive first at the health service (perhaps even for an important operation) and those however who don’t have the money are not part of that system that can access the private services and they are invited to wait even for months to have a scan.
We have done a draft law that will go through Parliament, (that we hope will tackle it with serenity) with which we really establish this universal right to care in an organic way.
We have also discussed how to distribute the resources of the framework law, that of the famous “little treasure” for the housing policies. We have also had some meetings and made some agreements with the Regions.
So basically, there is 550 million that has to be distributed to the towns that have problems with evicted tenants who don’t have the economic means to find another house. We have already decided how to allocate the money Region by Region, town by town.
I did this personally and I insisted at the Council of Ministers that they give me this task so that I could ensure there is not a sprinkling of money, but that there is a system of verification while the work is being carried out.
We talked about other important matters, for example about the regulation of transport. In relation to this we discussed how to balance the books of the Railways, as this is another issue.
The Railways have a deficit and there is a very simple way to not get them into a deficit, as someone has said, by increasing the fares. Certainly, it’s easy to say, but the issue is whether the Railway system is such that it is really making the best use of the money it gets from the State and the money it gets from the fares? Is there perhaps the need for a rationalization and a complete revision of the spending regime?
In this light we have decided to take action in two ways. One is in terms of the public transport system, needed by those who go to work in the mornings, the commuters, who must not be affected by the fare structures. What can be affected and must be affected is the fare structure for quality and for the elite.
On a transnational line in First Class you need to pay what is right. But if you are getting a train as a commuter to go to work even this must be a universal service.
Certainly, you can say that we are doing demagogy, but it isn’t demagogy: it is applying different solutions to different situations.

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

November 20, 2007

The social evil of work deaths

With a background of general indifference, every day one or more people die while they are at work, the so-called workplace fatalities.
The scale of this social evil is such that it could be considered a true emergency for the whole country. In 2007 it’s estimated there were 1400 people who died at work and tens of thousands of injured, often causing permanent invalidity.
It’s evident that what has been done so far, both at the level of legislation and in the way of greater efficacy in the controls that this Government has put in place, even though they are a step in the right direction, are not enough. Further measures must be put in place as soon as possible. These must include increasing the number of inspectors, as today there are not enough (in fact many companies never get a visit), and a different way of managing the contracting by the Public Administration. Activities are often handed over by the Public Administration and by companies with public participation to contracting companies who in turn contract them out to others and so on. This is done without any real control.
The last company in the chain is the least costly, but also the one that is least equipped. It often has underpaid workers, often not on the books, and it is the one that is most exposed to fatal accidents and unfortunately these often happen.
The Public Administration does not answer for these fatalities, but in reality it is responsible.
I propose that this chain of contractors and subcontractors starting with the Public Administration is limited. Furthermore, I propose that the civic responsibility for the accidents remains with the Public Administration that could in the end claim damages from the contractors.
PS. Today sees the creation of the new Newsletter of the party. For those who want to sign up to it and read the article, I’m giving a link to the Italia dei Valori website. The box in the top right-hand corner can be used to sign up to the future editions of the Newsletter.

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

November 18, 2007

Survey on Immigration

I’m publishing a survey on Immigration in Italy that was carried out by ISPO and presented at Vasto during the national meeting of Italia dei Valori.
The survey is explained in the video of professor Renato Mannheimer, the director of the Istituto di Studi sulla Pubblica Opinione.

Text:
As always in surveys, there’s talk of perceived insecurity and not real insecurity, and often perceived insecurity is higher than real insecurity. I would like to tell you about the general attitude of the Italians in relation to the phenomenon of immigration.
We have the good fortune to have data that can be compared over time, resulting from the survey done in 1999 with that done in 2007. Basically, the percentage of people who say that immigrants manage to integrate has gone down, while the number of those saying that they do integrate has gone up and has reached 45%, but that they are a bit closed in on themselves. It’s as though we Italains, have the idea that most immigrants make up a world of their own, that the process of integration does not work and creates dangers. This is a widespread social perception which is a cause for worry.
We see immigrants as a closed group, and our attitude in relation to the phenomenon of immigration is one of suspicion in which a significant proportion (31%) of Italians thinks that it is an inevitable phenomenon but a larger proportion (39%) thinks that it is a phenomenon that should be stopped. Five years ago, this same percentage was 24% and thus it has gone up over time.
Here’s there’s no reference to laws. Few Italians understand well how the various mechanisms work or are familiar with the Bossi-Fini mechanisms. The idea is that this phenomenon is scary, and thus a higher percentage, today the relative majority, say that the phenomenon must be stopped. Not an absolute majority, but 40% represents a good part of the population. It is a part that goes across the board. Within this 40% there are people on the Left and on the Right, with a leaning towards, but not totally, people who sympathise with the Centre Right. Then there are a lot of people who do not have sympathies at all, who are not interested in politics but who are fearful of the phenomenon of immigration.
If we have to do a summary of the attitudes towards foreigners who are immigrants, we find that there is one Italian in four, 25% who expresses a high level of fear. Apart from this 25% there’s another 16% who have a high to medium level of fear, which when added on means that we have 40% of the Italians who are fearful of the phenomenon. Thus there is a fear of the phenomenon that we cannot hide and that we need to do something about. To intervene well, we need to discuss the reasons.
There has been a lot of discussion between the relationship of criminality and immigration. This is a relationship that on one side is objective and on another side is subjective. It is objective because very often those who arrive are in disadvantageous and difficult situations, when they have not directly premeditated a criminal intention and it is easier for them to turn to criminal activity. Then for an objective position, the prison population has a very high proportion of immigrants and many crimes, often of a certain type, are committed by immigrants.
However there is also a subjective perception, that often does not coincide with the objective one. Some people maintain that immigrants from outside the European Union make life in our cities less safe. Others say this is not true. There’s 38% (that is always related to that 40% who are fearful) in agreement: our cities are less safe. Among these there are more who live in the North East, more among the housewives, who are not a category that is most active, but a category that is more isolated with less access to information and there are more, with an absolute majority, among the voters of the Centre Right. But I repeat, those that have this opinion are not only on the Centre Right. It is an opinion that goes across the board. This shows us how there is a strong relationship between the subjective perception that criminality is associated with immigration. Then we can discuss to what extent it is less than people perceive it to be.
However, I would like to add that immigration evokes other issues, about conflict and about worries. For example, to a lower but still significant extent, there’s agreement around the idea that immigrants take away work from Italains. The fact has been noted that immigrants at least do the work that the Italians don’t want to do or have the possibility not to do any longer. An even lower percentage say they do not trust immigrants, but the absolute majority don’t say that it is a difficulty, they say that it could be.
I would like to say that the problem is of importance, even though it is not considered to be a priority and of great importance as it was in 2001, and that the social fear of the phenomenon of immigration is widespread. We can estimate that those who have a strong feeling, who see immigrants as a threat, as between 30 and 40% of the Italians. It’s thought that these things must be resolved by the work of each one, by the capacity for understanding of each one, but especially by the public authority of the Government with ad hoc laws. Until today, legislation on immigration and criminality is at the same time not well known but anyway considered to be insufficient by this 40% who are fearful.”

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

November 16, 2007

Bureaucratic Italy

I’m publishing this letter sent to me by Ettore, one of the many Italians living and working abroad.
Ettore writes from Silicon Valley where Google has launched an important world-wide initiative for the development of a mobile platform.
Italy is excluded from this. The reason is the bureaucracy that oppresses our country.
This train that we have missed has very serious consequences and the evaluation is very important: bureaucratic countries are excluded from innovation and from development.

”Dear Di Pietro,
As you will know, Italy has been excluded by Google from the competition connected to the new mobile platform, called Android. Thus we are knocked down before we start the race for 10 million dollars that could have come to Italy. I would like to point out that Italy is the ONLY one, I repeat, the only State in the world that is excluded because of non-political reasons. (OK, even a part of Canada is excluded, but that’s just a part.) The reasons are the usual ones, the bureaucracy and the laws that are of another era that oblige Google to have a dialogue with Ministers, notaries, State monopolies and so on, with the inevitable result of a long and absurd process.
Google’s position is understandable. Who makes us, Google, do this to get a head ache (Italian-style) when I am offering 10 million dollars??
All this seems crazy to me: is it possible that this can be happening in 2007?
I would also like to reflect on another problem that is closely connected to the individual initiative and to the related infrastructure. Why is individual enterprise discouraged? I live in Silicon Valley, in California, and all around me I see twenty year olds who are starting one company after another and they are creating jobs, creating innovation, continually. Here there’s even a really great word for identifying these burgeoning companies: "startup".
Apple, HP, Google, Flickr, and Facebook, all started like that. To start up a company in California you need to fill in a form, pay a few dollars, and in half an hour you are away. In Italy I’m not saying it should be like that, but EVEN MORE SIMPLE, because there are no jobs: so then we need to create new ones, and who better than the young people have the will to create them?
So let’s facilitate, let’s invent, let’s make it possible to create startup and venture capital. What’s the point in complaining that there’s no work when we are complicating individual initiative? Directly hindering participation in a foreign competition? Listen to me: to resolve the problem of jobs, put the young people in a position to create them.
It would be great if you would talk about these basic issues (of infrastructure?) on your blog.
Compliments for your work and your honesty, that I appreciate.
It’s because of this that I am writing to you.
Ettore Pasquini"

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Competitiveness of the economic system
Commenti (0) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

November 13, 2007

Moratorium, now

The situation of public order connected to the flow of European Community citizens from the East is getting out of hand. That’s a fact.
Thefts in villas, episodes of violence even in public places, and even in broad daylight, are becoming a habit. The most recent victim is a Milan pensioner who died last night having been suffocated during a robbery by three people with a strong accent from the East. Today La Repubblica suggests having an investigation into prostitution by underage males in Rome.
They’ve written about hundreds of young lads from the East who are hired out by the hour or by the week. All in broad daylight.
The decree on security even though it is useful, is not enough. It has been overtaken by events. We need a moratorium for at least 2 or 3 years in relation to Romania and Bulgaria and then for the countries that are to enter the Schengen area in 2008.
Irregular people should be repatriated. Those who arrive in Italy must have a place to stay and a job. We are not Europe’s Vespasiano
Finally the penalties for those who give unofficial work to these wretches, to those who exploit under age prostitution and their clients must be made more severe. It’s not possible to wait.

Postato da Antonio Di Pietro in Justice
Commenti (8) | Scrivi | Iscriviti | Invia ad un amico | Stampa

Berlusconi and the State based on the Rule of Law

photo Adnkronos

Thinking about the comments expressed yesterday at Montecatini by Silvio Berlusconi concerning the judges and the magistracy, it seems to me that Berlusconi is lacking a sense of the State based on the Rule of Law, rather than lacking a sense of the division of powers. It’s in keeping with his character: there are those who stand with people like Falcone and Borsellino and those who stand with Mangano…
But more than Berlusconi, the problem is those Italians who want to close their eyes and pretend that there is gang warfare between the politicians and the magistracy: a smoke screen to criminalize certain prosecutors who were investigating the powerful.

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

November 12, 2007

Council of Ministers: Housing Policies and the Regions

In this meeting of the Council of Ministers the most important issue that we talked about was about housing policies.
550 million had been allocated to be used by 31 December this year to house those who have no home and who are living in destitution.
There are difficulties for the distribution of these funds. The criteria to decide how to share out the money adopted by the two people with the task, myself and the Minister Ferrero, contrast with an amendment by Parliament saying that the operation needs the consensus of all the regions and not just the majority of these. When making decisions, Democracy must try, to find the consensus of the majority and not of the whole set of individuals, otherwise it is transformed into a dictatorship.
In the video, (the text of which will be published) there’s the interview with Antonio Di Pietro.

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

Convicts in Parliament: No discount

On Tuesday 13 November, Italia dei Valori will lay before the 1° Commissione Affari Costituzionali a proposal to modify the amendment of the sponsor in relation to the impossibility of convicts to be Parliamentary candidates.

Carlo Costantini leads Italia dei Valori at the 1° Commissione Affari Costituzionali and he will present a sub-amendment to extend the effect of this to even a single day spent in prison.
After various discussions about the type of crime and the sentence to be taken into consideration to exclude convicts from Parliament, what has arrived with the 1° Commissione Affari Costituzionali of the Lower House, is the proposal of the Partito Democratico’s sponsor who has finally shown his cards with his amendment.
The sponsor’s amendment would exclude from Parliament only those who have been actually sentenced to two years imprisonment for unintentional crimes.
What is written down for crimes like corruption for an official action, fraud in public supplies, falsity of a public official in public acts, kidnapping, and fraud, sets out sentences with a maximum that is over 2 years but with a minimum that is often below that.
In reality then, what happens at the end of a trial is very different in our country. In fact in most cases the sentences given for the crimes mentioned here are often less than two years.
It’s evident that in relation to this we will respond by Tuesday 13 November which is the deadline to present any sub-amendments that there may be, with the only counter-proposal that is possible at this stage of the legislative process: a sub-amendment to extend the prohibition on being a candidate to those who have been sentenced to even one day of prison.

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

November 08, 2007

The judges become defendants

photo from repubblica.it
In recent days we have seen roles turned upside down. Judges are investigated for disciplinary activity as in the case of Clementina Forleo and Luigi De Magistris and instead no one talks about the politicians who are implicated in their investigations.
The tears of a judge are passed over as the expression of a person on the brink of a nervous breakdown, as though to witness their untrustworthiness. The investigations labeled Unipol and Why Not are dealing with people who are at the very top level and members of both political groupings, but every trace of their possible responsibilities has got lost. There’s a preference to focus the attention of the public on the presumed failings of the judges who have become defendants.
People are witnessing a stage play and they have understood the plot and who the actors are for some time. Attacks against Forleo and De Magistris are distancing the citizens from politics. Once more, the message has gone out that the politicians cannot be touched. All this makes our democracy weaker every day.

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

November 07, 2007

The Money of Milan People

Yesterday the City Councillor Raffaele Grassi of Italia dei Valori, made a speech in the Milan Council Meeting to ask for illumination of a financial operation of the Albertini Cabinet.
Ms Moratti was asked, given the political continuity of the two cabinets, to disassociate herself and to go on with the necessary checking on the very risky financial operations that could leave the balance sheet with a hole of more than 400 million Euro.
The administration of public money cannot be conducted in a way that is speculative and non-transparent by those who have to guarantee and protect the interests of the true owners of that money: the citizens.

Text:
”In the last few days I have come across an affair that started in 2005 when the city administration at that time, under the leadership of the former Mayor Albertini was faced with the need to find 100 million Euro to cover current spending transforming some current debts with certain banks, drawing up new contracts for mortgages so that they changed from favourable fixed rate interest rates that at that time were very low to variable rates. In the last two years these have seen a growth in interest rates on a world scale and they are showing exposure for all families. It is possible that this very strong consequence, could happen in relation to the city administration, even because the mortgages arranged with the new contracts have a 30 year limit.
I believe that it is an exposure of the so-called “derivatives” that the Albertini administration has always done in his task of public administrator. Given that the former Mayor Albertini has always complained about being an “administrator of a condominium”, I say that the administrator of a condominium has not done what he should have done, that like a good father of a family, he should have made investments that were prudent and clear.
Yesterday, 5 November, at the Council meeting I made a speech to denounce this fact, in which in fact we complain, on the part of the City Council and the Councillors of the removal of the power to control. We believe that the councillors should perform a form of control, whether they are in the majority and above all in opposition, so as to have the possibility to control the management of what the Cabinet does in relation to the administrative acts.
Unfortunately, the Albertini cabinet, the majority councillors, but above all, those in opposition did not even have this possibility, since the documents relating to this operation were kept secret by Albertini himself for a month, the natural time for doing this operation with the banks.
However I believe that we must not criticize the behaviour of the previous administration which may be legitimate to a greater or lesser extent, but we must ask what is the aim of the city administration, if the public administrators are delegated to speculate with the money of the people rather than carry out a whole series of interventions and give back the wealth collected in taxes as services to the citizens. This is the primary task of a public administrator.
If then we enter the mine field of financial operations, an eloquent example is what happened a few years ago between the ATM and the Del Monte bonds, in which 10 million Euro was lost at a time when the renewal of the work contract of the workers of the transport company were at risk while the directors were doing financial operations that then gave negative results.
I believe that in the near future Mayor Moratti must come and tell us at a Council meeting how things have gone, given that even the fact that the current majority is a continuation of the previous one, in which the Mayor has changed, but the same deputy Mayor, cabinet members and some of the councillors in the majority.
Meanwhile there are people who can be asked to give an account of what has happened, and I believe that the Mayor must come and tell us in the Council meeting. If this doesn’t happen, then as a member of Italia dei Valori I am formally committed to ask for a Committee of Enquiry so as not to lose precious time because never before this moment has it been more true, losing time means also losing money.
I will formalize this request as soon as possible with the appropriate people, but I have the impression that there will be an attempt to wriggle out of this by having a debate in the Accounts Committee. This too is an important body for discussing this, but I believe that in these sessions, where perhaps we will discuss this matter we need the presence of Mayor Moratti who has the duty as there is no member of the Cabinet with responsibility for Accounts.

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

November 06, 2007

The Honourability of the Directors

In August I wrote on this blog, an article (Geronzi: a step back) in which I asked for the suspension from his position of Cesare Geronzi until the final verdict is given, so as to safeguard the international reputation of Italian finance. The call fell on deaf ears.
I am publishing a letter by Antonio Borghesi, a deputy with Italia dei Valori. This letter is a further attempt to encourage the news media and the politicians to take up the discussion.
In the deafening general silence, on 10 October, Italia dei Valori put forward a draft law on this matter.

”It is unacceptable that at the top of important financial institutions, there are people who have lost the required honourability as they have been convicted of fraudulent bankruptcy. International credibility in our financial and banking system is needed and now we have decided to take action.
This is not the first time that I am intervening on this scandalous affair that has already gone beyond the boundaries of our country since the news has been reported by CNN.

At the top of two important institutions, namely Capitalia and Mediobanca, there’s a person who has lost the required honourability. I am referring to Cesare Geronzi, convicted at the first level for fraudulent bankruptcy and sentenced to eight months, and now considering recent happenings that see him being sent for trial for fraud in the collapse of Parmalat.

At the moment, the administrators of banks and financial institutions who have lost the required honourability must be suspended from their duties, however the Board of Directors has the power to reinstate them, if they feel that if they continue to have the trust of the shareholders there can be no obstacle.

But I am thinking: what counts more? The shareholders of a bank or the protection of savings and of savers?
It seems evident, even following the serious financial happenings that have been occurring in recent years, the need for a more rigorous behaviour from the investment companies and the banks in relation to the Directors, the CEOs and the Auditing Supervisors when they are convicted, even though it is not definitive, for banking and financial crimes, for the crime of false accounting, for crimes against public administration (embezzlement, abuse of office), crimes against public trust (falsity of money), against property (theft, robbery), against public order (associating to commit a crime), against the public economy and for tax matters.
I have decided to take action, by presenting a Draft Law (Proposta di legge 3135) with just two articles to modify the TUB (Testo Unico Bancario) and the TUF (Testo Unico della Finanza) so that the shareholders meetings cannot decide to reinstate people at the top of the company who have been temporarily suspended because of a conviction that is not yet definitive, until the criminal proceedings have had a definitive verdict.

This is a cautionary measure that is completely legitimate. We need international credibility in our financial and banking system.”

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

November 04, 2007

I’m going straight ahead

I’m publishing my response to Marco Travaglio’s letter called Quo vadis, Tonino'. After that I’ve added Marco’s reply. Both are published in today’s l'Unità.
Dear Travaglio
You column in today’s l'Unità, an article about myself entitled ‘Quo vadis, Tonino' has given me cause for reflection. I could support with a thousand reasons that are presumably good, the position taken by myself and Italia dei Valori in relation to our vote about the ‘Ponte sullo Stretto di Messina’ company (let it be clear, that not even I want this bridge nor is it being done) and also about the setting up of a Committee of Enquiry on the G8 in Genoa (that we support as long as judicial powers are not given to it, powers that should belong only to judges and as long as it is established that it deals not only with the misdeeds committed by the Police but also those committed by the ‘Blak Blocks’ and above all by their political backers). A Committee of Enquiry that you yourself count among those that you define “ …. Useless bodies, even damaging, since they have never been useful except for the production of majority or minority truths, that is party porkies, and that cloud the guilt of the enemies and exalt the merits of the friends and muddy the ideas even of those few people who think they have clear ideas…” (Mitrokin and Telecom Serbia docet!).
Presumably those who want to weigh up my good ideas can read them on my blog www.antoniodipietro.it.
But that’s not the point and you have rightly hit it (perhaps damaging my digestion but certainly opening my eyes for which I thank you): I and my party find ourselves in fact in the same position as the parties of Berlusconi and of Mastella.
I know in my heart that this is not what I wanted and that I want (and I ask the voters to pardon me for the embarrassment created) but – unfortunately – this is the message that has been transmitted and the blame, I have to admit, is not only due to the exploitation of others (that has happened and it’s happening now in abundance) but also to myself.
I have made a mistake in as much as I communicated badly and late what I believe to be “my good reasons”, perhaps mistaken but certainly in good faith.
Above all I made a mistake in not being able to find a political solution within the coalition in matters that – with dialogue and reciprocal understanding – could find a just solution (for example intervening in the drafting of the text of the law to set up the Committee of Enquiry so as to be sure that it didn’t just become a “trial” of the current judicial trials and so that precise markers and functional guarantees were in place).
It is also true that not even the “others” in the coalition have wanted to find a middle point but their error does not cancel out my own.
However one thing is certain, and for this I thank you for having pointed it out: as far as judicial politics is concerned, Italia dei Valori is doing its duty, and it’s true that we have finally succeeded to get the insertion of important regulations into the “security package”. Regulations like the restoration of the crime of false accounting and the elimination of the ex-Cirielli law on prescrizione {time limits for trials}.
I would like to continue in this direction and therefore I reply to your question “Quo vadis, Tonino?” in the only possible way: “I’m going straight ahead – from now on – with more attention to my travelling companions.”

Marco Travaglio’s response:

”It’s not every day that a Minister responds to the criticisms in a newspaper. And it hardly ever happens that he does so to say: “I made a mistake”. As a citizen I am grateful to him. As I believe are the readers and the voters as well.”

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

November 01, 2007

The Committee of Enquiry on the G8

The measure to set up the Committee of Enquiry on the G8 will soon be presented to Parliament. Italia dei Valori will vote for it with no problem if its amendment is accepted. The amendment obliges the Committee to look at the whole picture at 360 degrees and not, as has been proposed, just in one direction. There are two precise political responsibilities concerning the Genoa facts: those who allowed undefended people to be beaten up in the Diaz School and after that at Bolzaneto and those who shared and supported the attack on the institutions and on the city of Genoa with obvious public support to violent groups.
Trials by the magistracy to sort out responsibilities of the demonstrators and of the police forces are happening now and some sentences have been decided. The committee must in no way be a substitute for the judiciary but it must have a look at any possible political responsibilities, on one side or another.
It’s no good if the Committee is born cross-eyed just to please a part of the political scene. We want the whole truth on G8, not just a part of the truth.

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

Stop the Flow of People from Romania

photo from repubblica.it
The umpteenth hateful episode of violence against a woman has happened in Rome. The dynamics of the aggression were terrible. A lady aged 47 years, the wife of an admiral, was attacked at the station of Tor di Quinto. The person thought to be responsible is Romolus Mailat, a Romanian who lives in a camp near to the place where this event took place. The woman was beaten up, raped and killed. Her body was then dragged like an animal and thrown in a ditch. An aggressive incident that could happen to any woman in Italy.
The entrance of Romania to Europe has brought to Italy a mass of misfits without work and without other sources of income, some of whom are prone to petty crime. What’s needed is a government decree that blocks this flow and turns back all the Romanian citizens who cannot show that they have a job and a place to live in Italy.
The time needed for a draft law is too long. It is no longer enough to tackle the social emergency that we have under our eyes.
Just today I have asked the President of the Council, Romano Prodi for a decree to be discussed at the next meeting of the Council of Ministers together with a request for the immediate dismantling of all the abusive nomad camps.

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