The debate on cost-cutting policy and privileges of "caste" is a very slippery ground, given the high risk of incurring the best imagery from the Sports Bar can produce. Nevertheless, those who hold public office and the writer-as-he just voted in favor of upgrading its chip presence can not fail to participate in the discussion to clarify its position on and that's what I'll try to do here.
I begin by expressing a personal belief: the apparent discrepancy between fees charged and commitment required and the experience gained from many years now treading the rooms municipal permit me to say that none of the public administrators in charge, both in Executive Council in which both majority and opposition, carries on business for reasons other than those of politics as passion and service to our city.
I would also noted that not only the adjustment of the attendance of councilors from 20.99 to € 36.88 gross is required by law, because the City has exceeded 30 thousand inhabitants, but also the current interpretation of the rule suggests a reduction of inapplicable 'amount, as clearly explained by the Secretary General in the classroom during the council debate.
cha also note the estimated outlay for most of the municipal coffers, according to the Accounting Department, 7000-8000 is € / year (including the increase of the monthly allowance payable to the chairman of the Municipal Council) and the token is paid for actual presence the proceedings of the Board or the City Council and remains the same whether it's meetings by an hour of board meetings for six hours or more, shall be paid a single coin in each case. All too easy to compare this mode with the fat ones parliamentary allowances received in Rome or Brussels (or not to go too far, the Pirelli Tower) regardless of the presence in the classroom, so easy that I did not detain any more on this subject, just to avoid the risk I mentioned at the beginning.
I would rather here my reasons for voting for the resolution to increase the chip; vote that intellectual honesty compels me to declare related to the reasons outlined above, only a small part. I believe that the mountain of open public debate for some years in Italy towards the cost of politics has in fact given birth to a mouse of the attack today against the last of the row, the citizens' elected representatives in local governments, which are shrinking their numbers and the emoluments received, for one thing, the summer is a ministerial circular decreed that no longer have the attendance to all sessions of the leaders board, a provision which our City has run readily adjusted. Moreover, from a political class that submits the municipalities and other institutions closer to citizens a series of draconian cuts which threaten the very survival of the autonomy, as one might expect a different attitude towards those who work in those towns because local government is able to respond to social needs and protect the public functions? All this seems to democracy as what you do not want to define "an attempt" not to use words out of context, but "a joke" certainly yes.
Of course, I also have asked questions before voting on the resolution (I always do when I am going to approve or reject an administrative act) and I must say that my brief reviewing activities I found the council may have some reason to regret, for he was not yet able to achieve some goals, but no embarrassment, just as I do not feel any embarrassment to the conclusion that the proper adjustment dell'emolumento counselors perceive to terms law. If we want to get back on the now familiar refrain cost of the policy, consider them all, including those incurred personally by each director for travel, telephone charges, printing and copying, documents, etc.. and the less amount but still important, the time taken away from their work, family and personal interests.
Maybe it's time to mark a change in perspective and evaluate the cost, not so much policy as representative democracy, in terms that everyone with common sense would apply to the business of your own home. Why then do not expect a detailed account of the admissions counselors in the work of the Commissions and meetings of the Council, that the duties for which they have sought and obtained the votes of cernuschesi? And when he participates, the Council is silent on the upholstery, or involved with interpellations, proposals, criticism? Arrives or leaves in mid-meeting and received in real terms due to the double dell'emolumento? We may have some surprises.
Some time ago I read an article in a thought of Voltaire that sounds something like: "No one had no objections to the privileges of the nobility in France until they provided a government to the nation." Here we are far apart from the privileges of nobility and we're not talking about the nation's government, but it is perhaps time to ask ourselves what our elected representatives return to our community in exchange for the token received. On this I am open to any comparison.
Ermes Severgnini
Parent Board PRC-SE
0 comments:
Post a Comment