"Infrastructure, services, quality of life, to avoid depopulation of inland areas".

The PNRR funds are distributed over 7 missions that also concern the internal areas both transversally (e.g. for interventions on: digitalisation, rural pharmacies, ancient villages) and interventions that have not yet been accounted for. It will only be possible to have a precise picture once the Plan has been concluded. As for cohesion, we are still in a planning phase on the part of the Regions, so much so that committed resources amount to just over 18% of the allocated resources and expenditure to 5%. The available data are from the 2014-2020 programming (as of 31 December, expenditure is just over 450 million, 38% of the available funds) and those related to the allocation of national and European resources reserved for the 123 internal areas, amounting to 1,363 million euros.

The strategies adopted so far have not yielded satisfactory results, why?

I am neither used to nor interested in polemics, believing that problems should be solved rather than emphasised. It is clear, and the expenditure figures referring to the 2014-2020 programming confirm this, that the strategy for internal areas referred to has not yielded the results its promoters hoped for. Some of the remarks made by administrators working in the internal areas can be fully shared: lack of personnel and limited planning capacities, excessive administrative burden, difficulties related to multi-level governance, lack of previous experience of working together with other entities. For these reasons, the Plan has introduced important innovations: the strengthening of technical assistance and administrative capacity, with the possibility of using up to 5 per cent of the resources for dedicated support and the possibility of calling on the central structures that deal with internal areas, support for municipalities and regions, more streamlined governance, and computerised tools to facilitate the approval and management of interventions. In addition, the disbursement of resources is conditioned by more rigorous monitoring to ensure transparency and timeliness.

The Bishops have taken the field on this issue. Do you think the Church can play an important role for inland areas?

Absolutely. There is an overlap between the solutions proposed by the Bishops and the Plan. In the transport sector, for example, we plan to improve the road and rail network, strengthen public transport, promote innovative mobility, and invest in digital connections. As far as schools are concerned, there are plans to stabilise teachers, expand full-time education, and strengthen computer and digital connections and equipment. There is also no shortage of convergence in the area of health, such as the strengthening of hospital garrisons, emergency rooms, birth centres, territorial medicine, and telemedicine. In my letter of reply, I also invited the bishops to a discussion, including with the Cabina di Regia, to identify shared actions that would avoid a repetition of the critical issues encountered in the 2014-2020 management.

Are there also inland areas where depopulation will be inevitable? That are destined for total desertification?

The aim is to avoid such an eventuality, foreshadowed by some studies. It is precisely for this reason that the Plan is concerned not to leave any territory in the inland areas behind, offering everyone equal opportunities.