Marco Follini’s point of view for Adnkronos
“It is too early to say whether the ugly mess of the rising price of petrol will produce a sharply declining consensus for the government. Up to now Meloni had managed not to pay the price for the difficulties of her first days at Palazzo Chigi. luck, partly due to skill, partly due to the circumstances and partly also due to the involuntary favor that the chronicle of an opposition lost in its meanderings brings it almost day by day. polls have given a certain consistency to that ‘honeymoon’ that usually accompanies the first steps of a new government.
The increase in excise taxes on fuel now complicates things a bit. In fact, between cars, trucks and mopeds there are more than 50 million vehicles that are refueled almost daily at petrol stations. Enough for all citizens to do their accounts and draw their own conclusions. It is no coincidence that in our distant past it was above all the weaker and shaky governments that most tried to gain an ounce of popularity by promising to cut the price of fuel. I am speaking of the executives led by Pella in the 1950s and by Tambroni in the very early 1960s. As if to try to remedy the structural weakness of those governments. Which, however, closed its doors soon after.
Now, in Meloni’s case, things appear more complex. Indeed, it is true that (the) prime minister is paying a price of popularity and credibility on this front. But it is also true that we are just at the beginning, and that the executive can still count on the driving force that comes from a rather massive electoral investiture. Therefore, it will be appropriate to wait a little longer before drawing too definitive consequences from it.
Rather, this story raises a larger issue. And it is that of the difference between the words spoken during the long winters of opposition and the more realistic and much less generous and imaginative possibilities of the subsequent seasons of government. Which does not concern only this executive, of course. But it recounts all the difficulties and inconsistencies in which the coalitions that have gradually taken shape in recent years have struggled. Just think of the last legislature, among its changing, very changing combinations announced until the day before and the behaviors held the day after.
It will be recalled that just five years ago the M5S had proclaimed that it wanted to govern in solitude (and abolishing poverty, no less). Except then weave alliances across the board: with Salvini, then with the Democratic Party, then again with almost everyone, up to and including Berlusconi. Inconsistencies which, moreover, were in turn reflected in the equally serious inconsistencies of their adversaries – and allies at the same time. Everyone, except Fdi in this case.
Nor can it be said that the issue concerns only the formulas of government. It is on the merits of the measures, in fact, that the most casual somersaults are recorded. The day before, magnificent and progressive measures are announced. And the day after, inexorably, they come to terms with the scarcity of resources, the impotence of the public debt and the massive conditioning of the global economy. Up to doing the opposite of what had just been said.
So it would be appropriate not to exaggerate with the phantasmagorical promises. And if anything, to measure one’s good intentions with the less good, or less propitious, reality of the bonds that each government faces as soon as it has sworn into the hands of the head of state.
No electoral campaign suits the penitent’s habit. And it is all too well known that voters tend not to vote for parties and coalitions that present themselves with too grim a face. However, the conversion that takes place the next day does not appear less expensive. And that attitude to promise more than what can be delivered sooner or later comes back like a boomerang on those who exaggerate in feeding expectations. Also in this case, one might say: better less but better (copyright Mieli). Formula that was used at the time by Lenin, who also cannot be said to have been a master of good democratic manners”.
(by Marco Follini)