The definition and approval of the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (PNR) and the subsequent transmission to the European Commission if, on the one hand, supports the operations of the Draghi Government, on the other hand, in the programmatic scenario outlined in the PNRR and in the distribution of financial resources declined between the 6 Missions and the 16 Components, it opens up significant perplexities and criticisms.
Among these, the most incisive is certainly the one aimed at the overall allocation of resources for the South of Italy equal to 40% of the entire PNRR (209 billion euros), i.e. around 83.60 billion euros compared to the 34% expected. by the law for ordinary investments. Apparently a greater endowment of 6%, a considerable allocation to which, moreover, should be added, by admission of Minister Carfagna in an interview with Repubblica, the additional financial resources deriving from “another 8.4 from the React-Eu; 54 of structural funds 2021-2027; plus 58 from the Development Fund. Over 200 billion on which to lay the foundations for the socio-economic reunification of the country, which in the CDM I compared to that of Germany in the 1990s. The Covid tragedy can make us tear down the invisible wall that divides the two Italy “on which, towards the South, the persistent negative prejudices on waste, on the risks of the widespread presence of mafias, on the inability to spend and poor functioning of the bureaucratic systems weigh regional and local authorities.
All this in the face, by admission of Draghi himself, of a South which, compared to the North of Italy, records a persistent gap in GDP per capita, which has remained substantially unchanged, but also by a lower productivity, quality and quantity of human capital, of the infrastructures and services offered by the Public Administration, so much so that between 2008 and 2018, public spending on investments in the South more than halved and went from 21 to just over 10 billion. In fact, again according to Draghi, “The persistence of territorial gaps results in scarce job opportunities and the growth of emigration, in particular of young and skilled people, to the richest areas of the country and abroad” which generate further impoverishment of resident human capital. in the South and reduction of the possibilities of autonomous development of the same, considered, still today, “the most backward, largest and most populous area of the euro area”.
But the 83.60 billion euros that the PNRR allocates to Southern Italy are actually those that the EU legislation had foreseen? Or was a “robbery” perpetrated once again against the South of Italy which has now been consumed, as claimed by many scholars, since the beginning of the unification of Italy?
To answer this question it is necessary to resort to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), dating back to the Treaty on the Foundation of the European Economic Community (EEC), amended several times up to the Treaty of Lisbon (13/12/2007) ratified by Italy with Law 2/8/2008 n. 130 and which together with the Treaty on European Union (TEU) constitute the fundamental basis of primary law in the political system of the EU since they have equal legal value so as to be defined, as a whole, as “The Treaties”.
Specifically, the TFEU, as explained in the first paragraph of art. 1 “organizes the functioning of the Union and determines the sectors, the delimitation and the methods of exercising its competences.” Therefore, it constitutes the legal basis on which the Recovery and Resilience Device referred to in Regulation (EU) 2021/241 is based. It is, in fact, in the combined provisions of Articles 174 and 175 of the TFEU (Title XVIII – Economic, social and territorial cohesion) which establishes the obligation for the EU to develop and pursue “its action aimed at strengthening its economic, social and territorial cohesion” (Paragraph I ° art. 174), aiming to “reduce the gap between the levels of development of the various regions and the delay of the less favored regions” (Paragraph II art. 174).
As regards the maximum financial contribution, on the other hand, art. 11 paragraph 1 a) and B) of the aforementioned Regulation (EU) 2021/241 where it is established: “For each Member State, the maximum financial contribution is calculated as follows: a) for 70% of the amount referred to in Article 6 (1) (a), converted into current prices, on the basis of the population, the inverse of GDP per capita and the relative unemployment rate of each Member State, according to the methodology set out in Annex II; b) for 30% of the amount referred to in Article 6 (1) (a), converted into current prices, on the basis of population, of the inverse of GDP per capita and, in equal proportions, of the change in GDP in 2020 and the aggregate change in real GDP for the period 2020-2021, according to the methodology set out in Annex III. “
For this reason, as calculated in the “Territorial distribution in Italy, according to the EU parameters by macro-areas, regions and PA” elaborated by the “Movement 24 August – Territorial Equity” by Pino Aprile, the regions of Southern Italy should have assign not 40% of the resources, i.e. 83.60 billion euros, but 69.52%, i.e. 145.2968 billion euros, with a difference against Southern Italy and in favor of Central-Northern Italy of 61, 5968 billion euros.
In particular, according to this distribution, the southern regions should have been entitled (in euros): Abruzzo 4,232,488,141.95; Basilicata 2,288,104,202.61; Calabria 16,813,135,644.29; Campania 43,698,717,676.97; Molise 1,404,382,506.99; Puglia 26,779,735,841.37; Sardinia 8,897,688,272.96; Sicily 41,183,554,706.86.
Definitely remarkable figures are, undoubtedly, more credible to determine the long-awaited decisive turning point in favor of the South on which, as underlined by Draghi and Carfagna, in response to the protests of mayors and regional governors, weighs a long tradition of structural and atavistic weaknesses slowness. These judgments, however, seem to be disproved by the official data on the use of the European structural funds of the State General Accounting Office, which certifies spending percentages that are not excessively different between Southern and Northern Italy.
To explain it is Senator Saverio De Bonis who states “In Italy the resources deriving from European ESI funds (ERDF, ESF, EAFRD and EMFF) are managed through 83 operational programs of which 15 are owned by central administrations and 68 are owned by administrations regional. Now, the percentages of the Accounting Department even show a more virtuous South: the commitments of the ‘Less developed Regions’ are equal to 72.3%, being higher than those of the ‘More developed Regions’, equal to 70.6%. On the contrary, the payments are a little higher in the ‘More developed regions’, equal to 53.0%, compared to those in the ‘Less developed regions’, equal to 46.3%.
In short, in short, the usual confrontation / clash on the figures has begun in a scenario in which it now seems almost certain that the South will not get back the slightly less than 62 billion euros that should have been due to it from the correct application of art. 11 of the Device for Recovery and Resilience, but will receive in return the insult that on these resources, assigned to the Center-North of Italy, our children and, even more so, our grandchildren will also pay with absolute certainty the part of the contribution of indebtedness.
* Architect, PhD Urban and Territorial Planning, former professor of Urban Planning and Territorial Policies at UNIPA, Project manager of European and transcontinental inter-territorial and transnational programs.