Reforming the professions with the lever of subsidiarity
A path to modernisation and assumption of new responsibilities is needed
3' min read
3' min read
At a time when the state is struggling to keep up with the social and economic complexity that the contemporary world imposes, the principle of subsidiarity is once again imposing itself as the foundation of a modern vision of public action. This is neither an abstract concept nor a doctrinal suggestion. On the contrary, subsidiarity - in its vertical and horizontal meanings - represents a concrete lever for reforming institutions, rationalising resources, and harnessing the energies diffused in civil society. And it is precisely in this framework that reflection on the urgent reform of the system of the Ordinary Professions takes place.
Professional Associations, public law bodies with an associative basis, are by nature the expression of that 'organised subsidiarity' that Article 118(4) of the Constitution elevates to a general principle of the legal system. They are entities that operate in the name and on behalf of the State, exercising functions of public relevance - from the keeping of registers to deontological supervision - and, at the same time, act as representatives of the professional communities, contributing to the protection of essential collective interests: health, legality, safety, social justice, work.
But if we are to fully implement the principle of subsidiarity, we need a clear, consistent, up-to-date framework. A new regulatory architecture that puts the principle of subsidiary responsibility at the centre, based on an indispensable prerequisite: the presence of solid and structured ministerial supervision.
Without such an articulated public direction, the principle of subsidiarity risks being translated into deresponsibilising delegation and institutional fragmentation. What is needed, therefore, is for the Orders to modernise and assume new responsibilities, through which functions can be transferred from the state to the professions.
Let us think, for example, of the role that the Orders can play in continuing education, in issuing technical and specialist opinions on sectoral regulations, in promoting public ethics and social sustainability, in managing special lists, in verifying professional skills for the purpose of access to public incentives. All areas in which proximity to the territory and direct knowledge of the professional context represent a competitive advantage that the central state alone cannot guarantee.
