Catanzaro took to the streets against the Calderoli bill on differentiated autonomy.
The event took place simultaneously with the discussion in the Chamber of Deputies of the Calderoli bill (after its approval in the Senate last January) and was one of the many demonstrations in the main Italian squares, from north to south, as a sign of strong opposition to a reform considered divisive for the country.
The Catanzaro demonstration, organized by the “Committee for the withdrawal of all differentiated autonomy, for the Unity of the Republic and Equality of Rights”, saw the participation of numerous citizens, associations and institutional representatives at regional level.
The mayor of Catanzaro, Nicola Fiorita, was present: “This reform – he said – raises fundamental questions, especially regarding the reasons of those who support it. At the moment, it seems that no one, not even within the Northern League, is really in favor of this proposal. Even some Northern League representatives in the south are dissociating themselves from it. The main dilemma is: why should Parliament approve a reform that the majority of the population and its own members do not consider useful?
The comparison becomes increasingly complicated when there are no convincing proponents of the reform. Those who are against find themselves in dialogue with a void of clear positions, in which only precise and repetitive preliminary conditions are heard: “LABs first, money first”. But why should we accept that Parliament approves something that the majority rejects and which lacks popular support?
It is clear that the current system of resource distribution is not fair, based on a principle of historical spending that favors those who have already spent the most. Everyone agrees on the need for a new distribution system, but this does not necessarily require reform on differentiated autonomy. Before differentiating, we must build a system that guarantees essential rights for all.
The danger is that by proceeding with differentiated autonomy reform before establishing these foundations, we find ourselves passively accepting a change that may be against our interests. This could lead us to a situation where we gradually adapt to a reform that could ultimately damage our very existence.
The metaphor of the boiled frog is significant: if we gradually adapt to the reform, without firmly opposing it, we could find ourselves “boiled” without even realizing it. Instead, we must recognize that a reform that only serves to maintain the privileges of a few is unacceptable. Our community can only thrive if it shares principles of equality, solidarity and a common project.
We must continue our fight, as mayors, citizens and communities, so that this reform does not threaten only the South, but the entire country”.
