The debate on regions is on a dead track

One year after the approval of the law on differentiated autonomy, the debate on the regions seems to have ended on a dead track. The reform wanted by Minister Calderoli had attracted a great deal of attention - positive or negative depending on one's point of view - but today, with the exception of the third term for presidents, there is little talk about regions and local autonomies. Although there is much to think about.

At the beginning of the legislature, regional autonomy was one of the main objectives of the majority, together with the premierate and judicial reform. It was no coincidence that Law No. 86 of 26 June 2024 (better known as the Calderoli Law) had been approved after a parliamentary process in forced stages. It seemed to be at a turning point, but this was not the case. Against the law, a massive collection of signatures for the abrogative referendum was organised in a short time. This initiative was followed by two further steps. In November, the Constitutional Court intervened severely on the law, declaring it unconstitutional in several aspects. And shortly afterwards, it judged the referendum, which should have been voted on together with those on work and citizenship, to be inadmissible (depriving the achievement of a quorum of a significant boost, given the strong opposition of southerners on all sides).

Since then, despite some attempts by Minister Calderoli, the debate has essentially ground to a halt. Rightly so, because as the Court ruled, that law went in the wrong direction. However, the rich debate that has taken place in the meantime should not be wasted. Because important challenges had emerged, from a new reform of Title V to the need to replace the competitive approach with the cooperative one (as signalled by the Consulta) to various other issues. Take, for example, health care, which is now of concern to many Italians: the pandemic had highlighted the limits of autonomy, given that the transfer of health powers to the regions (largely implemented after 2001) had not been accompanied by a well-defined national strategy, so much so that it was difficult to define a shared approach to coping with the Covid. During the emergency there was much talk about it, but then there was no follow-up. Another crucial challenge is administrative efficiency: a problem for the regions since their creation, which today causes worrying delays in the implementation of the NRP.

With regard to local authorities, mention should be made of the provinces, which were reformed several years ago but in an incomplete manner: there is no longer a vote for these bodies but they have retained some functions, albeit reduced. They have retained competences that are not well delineated, with overlaps and fragmentation, and there is often a lack of effective coordination with the regions, leading to inefficiency. Staying within the territory, the inland areas also require more attention. They have to deal with numerous problems, from physical connections to slow Internet connections - leading to double isolation - not to mention the closure of schools and the lack of services. It is no coincidence that some territories are becoming depopulated. I was struck to see in a southern province an election propaganda poster in which the administrators of one town pointed out that they had lost fewer inhabitants than neighbouring municipalities. This brings us to the big issue of the South and inequalities compared to the Centre-North. All over the world, development gaps are perceived as a crucial challenge, while in Italy, after the abolition of extraordinary intervention in 1993, the issue was muted. However, it remains like an elephant in the room and leaves ample room for manoeuvre for organised crime.

Given that differentiated autonomy is not the right way forward, it is to be hoped that new avenues will be opened to improve the governance of territories in a perspective of national cohesion. Different political modalities would also be useful. Up to now, we have been moving forward by majority, most recently the centre-right, but the centre-left had also done so with the reform of Title V of the Constitution. If we could converge on a bipartisan orientation, we could jointly seek answers to the many needs of our territories, starting with the most fragile ones.