Italy Needs a Statesman Not a Salesman

posted by Geoff Andrews at Friday, August 26, 2011

MSN 25 August


The sharp fall in Italian markets over recent weeks has plunged Italy into a severe economic crisis, with the alarming prospect of the third largest economy in the Eurozone asking for a bailout. Emergency meetings between Italian government officials and EU officials were followed by the decision of the European Central Bank (ECB) to buy Italian government bonds and thereby reduce borrowing costs, as long as the Italian government introduced radical austerity measures. While offering some immediate relief for the Italian economy, it has so far failed to bring any stability, with the Milan stock exchange and FIAT suffering major losses in recent days.

The austerity measures include cuts to regional government, public sector employee salary benefits and a ‘solidarity’ tax for employees earning in access of 90,000 euros. These have already been hotly debated within the cabinet and parliament, with Italy’s Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi having to retreat heavily on previous commitments to reducing taxes, at the cost of much discontent from the Northern League, his main coalition ally. In fact many of these proposals recommend the precise opposite to the key tenets of ‘Berlusconismo’; the populist programme of low taxes and quick fixes which brought him to power in the first place.

However, more worrying for Italy’s long-term recovery has been the continual political crisis at the heart of the Italian government. Indeed, it is the Berlusconi leadership which remains Italy’s biggest cause for concern. In his keynote speech to the Italian parliament on 3 August, postponed until after the markets closed and intended to calm fears about rapidly escalating debt, Berlusconi refused to accept that the Italian economy was in serious crisis or that there was any doubt that it would recover. The economy, he announced to general incredulity, ‘is solid’. As a result he failed to advocate any long-term reform package or viable economic strategy. Instead, he fell back on his populist stance as a successful businessman who understood the needs of the Italian economy.

In fact, not only did Berlusconi’s speech do little to raise market confidence over Italy’s spiralling debt problem, it has prolonged Italy’s political stalemate. It is this long-running political crisis which casts most doubt on Italy’s prospects for urgent reform. As the respected Corriere della Sera columnist Massimo Franco has put it recently: Italy is ‘in a climate of stable instability’, and there is little indication of breaking out of the impasse while Berlusconi remains in power.

While its economic woes have to be understood in the context of a wider Eurozone predicament, the lack of political reform, absence of economic strategy and internal cabinet divisions offer little hope for long-term change while Mr Berlusconi remains in power. It is revealing that despite the Italian government’s earlier austerity package and subsequent announcements that it would aim to balance its budget by 2013, it has taken external pressure in the form of the European Union rather than a national strategy formulated by the Italian government to raise optimism of a revival of Italy’s economy. As many commentators have argued, Europe needs strong and decisive leadership at this time. Berlusconi, however, is clearly not up to the task.

As the country most vulnerable to the Greece scenario, Italy desperately needs some statesmanlike intervention. It has been held back by internal political conflicts, notably those between Berlusconi and his Treasury Minister Giulio Tremonti over the former’s earlier proposal of tax cuts, and pressure from the regionalist Northern League for devolution, including fiscal federalism and the movement of government ministries to the North.

Instead, what we are witnessing in Berlusconi’s leadership is less that of a statesman and more the machinations of a salesman. Engulfed in allegations of corruption and sex scandals, a large part of his political energy is now devoted to protecting his interests, through hastily prepared parliamentary immunity legislation or attacks on the prosecuting magistrates. Though he has already nominated Angelino Alfano, his former justice minister, (and the originator of the Alfano Law in 2008 which gave parliamentary immunity to the top four positions in government before it was declared ‘unconstitutional’), as his successor, he has already ruled out early elections and insists he will not change course. His main focus seems to be developing an exit strategy on his terms which limits his chances of further prosecution. It is now abundantly clear that Italy’s political and economic stability has been compromised because of the private and public predicaments of Silvio Berlusconi.

The likelihood of Italy finally introducing some liberalisation measures owes little to any initiative on Berlusconi’s part. His governments have had a long time to formulate a strategy to deal with rising debt, but instead they have reacted belatedly to market pressures. The crisis is also a reflection of the ineptness of Italy’s opposition and, after all that it has happened, the unwillingness or inability of his government allies to act against him, while Mr Berlusconi has dismissed the possibility of being replaced by a ‘technocratic’ government made up of cross-party or independent figures such as Mario Monti, the former European Commissioner. If he is allowed to carry on for much longer then Italy’s economic future is bleak indeed.

Grassroots Reporting Can Replace Murdoch Media

posted by Geoff Andrews at Tuesday, August 02, 2011

published on MSN 27 July


The last few weeks have seen an extraordinary change in the relationship between Rupert Murdoch, the political class and British public opinion. For years, Labour and Conservative leaders have courted and dined the media mogul, with an unspoken acceptance that his support and that of his papers was crucial for any election victory.

The ‘Hackgate’ scandal has changed all that. The parliamentary interrogation of Rupert and James Murdoch, and Rebekah Brooks was dramatic confirmation that the tables have turned. The most ‘humble’ day of Rupert Murdoch’s life, when he had to answer to a parliamentary committee for the behaviour and practices of his staff, has given renewed vigour to parliamentarians and all those who have felt that the Murdoch empire had become too powerful.


As is now becoming clear, Hackgate cannot be confined to the actions of a few News of the World journalists and Metropolitan police officers. Rather it has erupted into a profound crisis in the relationship between the media and politicians, another example of the fractured and decaying nature of British public life.

While it may be too early to write the obituary of the spin doctor, the secretive and arrogant styles of media and political elites has taken a sharp jolt, and will never be quite the same again. For the last two decades or so British politics has been driven by spin and croneyism, with the most decisive political relationship increasingly that between the party’s communications directors and the press.

This showed contempt for the public and resulted in the marginalisation of other political voices. In the aftermath of Hackgate, Tory backbenchers have complained that while they only had limited access to the PM, Rebekah Brooks and colleagues were welcomed at all times; similar stories are recounted from the Peter Mandelson and Alistair Campbell era of New Labour dominance.


However, out of a crisis new opportunities often emerge. At the same time as the powerful media corporations are forced to justify their methods, the rise of social media like Facebook and Twitter has challenged power elites from below. This has been crucial in the Arab Spring, both in reporting the events to a wider audience (in some cases before the mainstream media arrived) as well as galvanising the actions of protesters. Facebook was also crucial in the defeat of Silvio Berlusconi in a significant regional election in Milan, while blogging continues to give space to citizen journalists.


We cannot assume that a combination of these two developments will necessarily lead to a long-term shift to greater transparency and democracy in the role of the media. For example, Rupert Murdoch still has massive media interests in the US and Silvio Berlusconi’s Mediaset empire is yet to receive the kind of scrutiny we have witnessed over the last fortnight in the UK. However, nobody could have predicted the speed with which the Murdochs were called to account. Much will depend on which of our politicians and political movements grasp the new opportunities. The Hackgate scandal continues to uncover new revelations almost on a daily basis and is also shifting the balance of power in British politics, with a rejuvenated Ed Miliband looking to profit and David Cameron’s leadership now in doubt. This suggests that an open and transparent media remains crucial to democratic debate. There is the chance now that we will not only see a more responsible media but the development of more inquisitive and grassroots reporting.