“What has happened in recent days is absolutely natural. There was no single budget law that saw no turmoil and controversy, even within the majority. In this specific case, there were some misunderstandings within the League, but everything was resolved with minimal delay. What ultimately matters is having finalised a balanced, serious budget law that ensures – with the reduction of the personal income tax rate (IRPEF) – tax cuts for the middle class and support for companies, while ensuring the stability of public accounts.”
Antonio Tajani, leader of Forza Italia, Deputy Prime Minister, and Foreign Minister, downplays the disputes within the League and with Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti. He emphasizes his party’s overall mediation role and is already looking ahead to Italy’s exit from the infringement procedure: “I hope it will be soon.”
In short, the budget law is moving toward adoption: with what results?
“It is a budget law going in the right direction, because it aims to help the middle class, by reducing the IRPEF tax rate from 35 to 33 percent, and the tax burden on companies with hyper-depreciation, as well as encouraging contractual increases with tax exemptions for lower-paid workers. Not to mention the increased investment in healthcare. In this context, I also wish to emphasize the determination of Minister Paolo Zangrillo who, despite obstructionism from the CGIL, managed to secure the renewal of many public sector contracts, starting with those for doctors and nurses.”
What role did Forza Italia play in tackling the most complex issues of the budget law?
«I claim and reaffirm the valuable role of a party that has always been a balancing factor, even in the internal debate within the centre-right. We avoided new taxes on housing by preventing an increase in the rate for short-term rentals. We also intervened to send a signal to law enforcement agencies. We managed to prevent a relentless attack on companies with the new tax on dividends, not just for large companies but also for small ones.”
Has a balance also been found on banks?
“Yes, because we were the party that worked harder than any other one to foster dialogue between the parties, without impositions that could frighten markets and appear as relentless targeting of credit institutions, even to protect small banks.”
Some argue that we are ultimately faced with a non-expansionary budget, not to say austerity. How important has been the desire to exit the infringement procedure as quickly as possible?
“Exiting the infringement procedure means ensuring the country’s credibility and fostering investment and growth, which in turn drives the government’s economic action, saving billions in debt servicing, also thanks to the increasingly favourable ratings of rating agencies. All of this is in the best interests of Italians, and I hope the stated goal will be achieved very soon.”
As Foreign Minister, can you tell us what role is Italy playing between Europe, the United States and Russia?
“Italy has been a key player in recent balanced and sensible decisions, both regarding aid to Ukraine and Mercosur. As to the first issue, we have always stated we had serious doubts about the legal basis for the use of frozen Russian assets. Instead, by focusing on European debt – on Eurobonds – we have forcefully made a truly pro-European choice. We have prevented States from being forced to pay in the event of a dispute with Russia, without thereby failing to fulfil our commitments to support Ukraine.
What about Mercosur?
We are convinced that we need to sign the treaty because it is beneficial for our country to have another market where we can work better, but we must do so while also safeguarding the agricultural sector. In this context, I wish to emphasize that our exports, despite tariffs, are booming: we are once again the world’s fourth-largest trading power.
Reverting to the Russia-Ukraine conflict, how do you view the reopening of dialogue between Putin and Macron?
“It is certainly good to reopen a channel of communication, but the channel needs to be European: it cannot be limited to just one country. The important thing is for Putin to speak again with the whole of Europe.”
What can Italy do in this direction?
“We must all work for peace, which is the primary goal. In this sense, just to be clear, the premise is that we have never been at war with Russia in recent years. Italy has always been the country that has clearly distinguished between aid to Ukraine, to prevent its defeat, and war with Russia. We have only helped Ukraine defend itself, which is a different matter from waging war on Russia.”
How can we therefore act for peace today?
We have always supported US efforts. Therefore, any initiative that leads to peace needs to be viewed very positively: always with security guarantees for Ukraine, with a sort of Article 5-bis based on the NATO model, including US participation. At this juncture, it is up to Russia to decide whether it wants to sit down at the negotiating table and engage in negotiations also with Europeans, because Europe cannot help but be a key player in peace negotiations, especially since sanctions and our security depend on the ceasefire and peace.
All this while continuing to help Ukraine? For the next decree-law, however, the League is digging in its heels regarding military supplies. How can you get out of this situation this time? «
“Of course, this decree will also be adopted. The right balance must always be found. I am in favour of aid being primarily civilian in nature, which means helping the population resist winter. Let us keep in mind that many power plants have been destroyed by Russia, and we must help rebuild the electricity grid: resistance to the Russian invasion is also the resistance of the Ukrainian people.”
But will there also be a new shipment of weapons?
“I hope there will be no need to send any more weapons if peace is achieved. But, where necessary, there will also be shipments of military equipment. It seems to me that the League did not back out in its voting, because we must not confuse the legitimate positions of a party with preventing the adoption of a decree deemed necessary by the government.”
