Home » Citizenship income, those who want to stop and those who ask for changes: programs compared

Citizenship income, those who want to stop and those who ask for changes: programs compared

by admin
Citizenship income, those who want to stop and those who ask for changes: programs compared

Workhorse of the 5 Star Movement, (which he calls for “strengthening” in his program with “measures to make the system of active policies more efficient and monitoring anti-fraud measures”) citizenship income has always been in the crosshairs of the center-right. It is no coincidence that the latter is very clear in its common program, because it calls for “the replacement of the current DRC with more effective measures of social inclusion and active policies for training and integration into the world of work”. While Action and Iv, pending the formalization of the program, they would aim at a substantial reform (even if Iv – promoter of a referendum for the abolition – would have preferred a cancellation tout court, at least for the “employable” groups of beneficiaries).

Citizenship income must be abolished

Fdi, is drastic, proposing its abolition. The leader Giorgia Meloni has often said this. And she reiterated it today with the group leader in the Senate Luca Ciriani: “Citizenship income goes deletedone thing is the sacrosanct duty to help those in difficulty because they cannot work, another is to give a state check to those who do not want to work “

League: it doesn’t work, too many frauds

The League in its program recalls that the Citizenship Income has reached its third year of life. And that “as it is, it doesn’t work.” Born as an experimental measure, “it was a help during the pandemic, but there was too much fraud.” So much so that 74% of the scams would be “attributable to false declarations on residence and citizenship”. Scams that
they would be canceled if the ex ante controls were made by local authorities.

See also  Tax justice, the news of the reform

The reform mechanism

Specifically, however, the League points to a “profound reform” of income, which means: maintaining income support “for recipients who are unsuitable for work, reviewing the access criteria, giving greater weight to the family quotient, reshaping the amounts in function of the different thresholds of absolute poverty (and therefore of the purchasing power) registered on the national territory ». While for the earners suitable for work, «the measure is instead reformed by transforming it into a real one social safety net aimed at employment: training course, internship and contracting of recipients at the end of the course, through the involvement of private employment agencies, employers’ associations and through the use of tax and social security incentives for the recruitment of recipients ».

Pd: no to the penalization of large families

The Democratic Party, on the other hand, speaks in a softer way of the need to “appropriately recalibrate” the citizenship income, “according to the indications drawn up by the Saracen Commission, starting with the unjustified penalization of large families and / or with minors”. And he adds that it is necessary to complete the system with another mechanism: the public integration to the remuneration (in-work benefit) in favor of low-income workers, as proposed by the Commission on poor work.

You may also like

Leave a Comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

This website uses cookies to improve your experience. We'll assume you're ok with this, but you can opt-out if you wish. Accept Read More

Privacy & Cookies Policy