This discussion over the extent of governmental and parliamentary reform required in Italy today commenced with the observation that the currently prevailing approach to institutional reform seems to be rooted in an awareness of the need for cultural change. Thus the debate between whether to carry out the minimum change required or to enact sweeping reforms appears to have been superseded by an approach that leaves behind attempts to pay mere lip service to reform and firmly seeks to address actual needs.
These needs stem from real problems whose effects are being felt in Italy, and which are in part attributable to reforms of recent years that have proved to be problematic over time. In addition, certain areas requiring targeted reforms have also emerged, some of which are currently in the process of being addressed at the national and European levels.
The participants highlighted that the country’s real problems include a growing demand from civil society for good governance and for a renewed decision-making capacity on the part of institutions called upon to make decisions. In terms of relations between government and the parliament, it was stressed that the quality of decision-making is not aided by governments making a systematic practice of pushing through wholesale legislative amendments on a confidence vote. A further problem is the highly adversarial nature of the relationship between the various branches of the State, particularly between the Italian political sphere and the judiciary.
There is also a need, it was felt, to restore balance to the relationship between the Italian State and regions, which has been complicated by amendments (introduced by Constitutional Law no. 3/2001) to article 117 of the Italian Constitution. These changes have sparked conflicting interpretations of the division of powers between the two levels of government, and the necessary lead-time for constitutional rulings to clarify the situation has had a paralyzing effect on sectors such as health.
As far as areas requiring targeted measures are concerned, the participants pointed both to certain reforms currently underway and several reform options aimed at addressing particular regulatory issues as worthy of note. Chief among the reforms currently in progress is fiscal federalism, the phasing in of which will lead to a rebalancing of the relationship between the State and the regions, by addressing the need for greater transparency in the proceedings of the State-Regional Conference and for a review of the division of powers under article 117 of the Constitution, whilst not forgetting the importance of reforming the co-equal bicameral system, in respect of which the composition of a federal Senate is envisaged.
At the European level, moves are underway to introduce a European semester system for peer review of national budget plans together with changes to the Pact of Convergence. This reform process will entail efforts to reconcile national sovereignty with devolution of powers to the European level, as well as to reform mechanisms relating to institutional decision-making capacity. In conclusion, it was noted that debate on this point seems to be focused on the perceived need for measures which ensure the stability of the political system and governability, such as electoral reforms that enshrine the electorate’s right to choose candidates whilst, at the same time, reopening the debate over the possibility of reinstating parliamentary immunity for representatives elected via new electoral mechanisms.