[ad_1]
Minister Provenzano (by the way, in the writer’s opinion, among the best ministers of this government) closed his interview with Repubblica this morning (collected by Concita De Gregorio) with a beautiful quote by Pasolini addressed to Nenni (it was the summer of 1961) . “If we can’t do everything, wouldn’t it be okay to be content with doing little? The fight without victory withers.
Beautiful summary, I wrote and such is. Furthermore, the minister will not be hurt if I tell him that a few days ago, in a personal exchange between us, he had already returned it to me, making me reflect even then on the intimate truth of those words. Provenzano, like others and other government representatives (Lamorgese, Bellanova, Catalfo, Mauri and, obviously, Prime Minister Conte), fought with all means and with the firm will to achieve the objective that was communicated last night at the end of the period. Council of Ministers provided for in the Relaunch Decree.
The detail of the solution, as you have understood, we are talking about the regularization of agricultural workers, domestic workers, caregivers and other categories, is amply illustrated by newspapers and televisions (in short, the compromise reached establishes that together with regularization “traditional” and already experienced, with the employer that declares the previous condition of irregularity and proceeds to remedy it, each immigrant is offered to comply with a new legal employment contract).
The only condition is that you have already had a permit, even if it has expired, or you have applied for asylum. In addition, and the norm should favor the hired workers of the capes, the application for regularization can start from the individual worker who declares to have worked in the sector. These are issued with a temporary 6-month work search permit, which can be converted into a residence permit for the duration of the contract obtained. If these immigrants lose their new job, they will have one year of time, with valid permission, to search and find another. It should be noted that the rule to facilitate the appearance of black and white workers will also apply to many Italian workers).
I think it is true, there is no reason to doubt it, that the one born after days (and nights) of a negotiation started, then failed, then resumed and was completed, represented the best possible result under the given conditions. Hence the value of that reference to the poet. After all, just the idea that instead of those who are there now might have been the first, it gives each assembled brick the value it deserves.
The point, therefore, is not (at least for me) to distance ourselves from what the government has produced. I respect the effort and commitment poured out and I know like everyone the difficulty of combining in a synthesis different points of view and starting points or, as in this case, even opposites. But exactly here a fundamental question is posed to politics and the Democratic Party regarding the nature of government and the role of the left. I believe that in the face of the pandemic, the choice of a pure (and added utility) civilization that would have been necessary was an urgent amnesty for all irregular immigrants present in our country.
I write it for a double reason (perhaps already mentioned): by a principle of respect and promotion of human rights (among them, the prevention and treatment) of each person, and at the same time by a guarantee of safety for the entire population , subject to strict rules of behavior and distance that are poorly reconciled (in fact, not reconciled) with the dispersion in the territory of thousands (or tens of thousands, or God forbid, hundreds of thousands) of women and men without identity, illegal immigrants, and thus the latter among the latter, often housed (and stacked) in uninhabitable ghettos and potential repositories of uncontrolled outbreaks of the virus.
Translated, the question should have been attacked first from the point of view of health (we are in an unsolved pandemic) than from the (certainly fundamental) aspect of regulating unprotected sectors in the labor market. This was not the case.
And it wasn’t, so to speak, because the numerically strongest force of the majority (the 5Stelle) has long opposed not only this last wise solution, but any intervention aimed at mitigating the damage and drama. of that “invisible” piece (only for those who do not intend to see) of our society.
Why did they do it?
I am not an expert in the internal dynamics of that movement. So, to order the factors, I would say why they never solved (or dissolved or truncated) the Gordian knot of their government identity or culture. Because after applauding Salvini’s decrees, a part of them feared sacrificing more ounces of consent to the right. Or perhaps because a part of the current summit shares precisely those values that before the yellow-red experience had baptized the yellow-green nightmare. Perhaps he weighed a mixture of these factors, which would explain the double steps, the close agreements and the next day, the exhausting tactic of a negotiation worthy of the best cause.
Whatever the photography was like this was. But then?
Then there is one point, and I would like to point it out. If in the most acute phase of the tragedy (the worst in recent decades) that affects the Italian economy and people, the government sees that such distant conceptions of the founding principles coexist with an idea of Italy that will be, even in the The frontier of human rights protection, the cornerstone of our vision of the liberal West and its constitutive values, there is an almost insurmountable effort to dismantle the ambiguity of a movement that emerged to undermine representative democracy and today, at least in numbers, the first architect of his patrimony, this is if these are some of the questions that it is legitimate to ask: where the progressive reading of the after and the broad left must plant the stake destined to mark that beyond that line it cannot continue?
In summary, what should be and where should be placed, following the warning directed by Pasolini to Nenni, the operative act that imposes a force like ours that pursues the interest of the community of not allowing anyone to neglect or trample on the stones. cornerstones of coexistence and democracy?
How far is it reasonable to go? How far can you go?
Just this one.
[ad_2]
