Care for the elderly or early retirement? The reform that’s missing

The forthcoming Budget Bill, the last of this parliamentary term, will inevitably feature all the hallmarks of a pre-election manoeuvre: political parties will call for fiscal expansion, the government will approve a few incentives to win the votes of specific groups, and the opposition will claim that it is not enough.

Pensions are sure to be a key area of contention, with proposals for early retirement or a freeze on the adjustment of the retirement age. The first half of this match was played out in the previous Budget Bill, in which the government partially reduced the automatic adjustment of the retirement age in line with life expectancy, whilst the opposition and even the majority parties were calling for a total freeze. In the end, the government’s measure – which reduced the increase in the retirement age requirements for 2027 by two months (out of the three planned) – cost around 1.5 billion, compared with a complete freeze for 2028 as well, which would have cost twice as much, benefiting around 250,000 pensioners. It is only natural that political parties should seek to win the vote of pensioners in Europe’s oldest country. Indeed, in 2025, Italy had the lowest proportion of young people (11.9 per cent) and the highest proportion of older people (24.7 per cent) in the European Union.

Yet there are more efficient and forward-thinking – though by no means less popular – ways of addressing an ageing population. Such as caring for those who are unable to look after themselves. The issue of care for the elderly has been revived by the ‘Patto per un nuovo welfare sulla non autosufficienza’, the network of associations that championed the reform of the sector included by the Draghi government in the National Recovery and Resilience Plan (Minister Orlando) and subsequently approved by the Meloni government (Minister Calderone).

The problem is that, formally speaking, this is an ‘achieved’ objective of the NRRP, but in substance the reform approved in 2023 is still an empty shell. Yet the implementation of this initiative, which has involved governments of various political persuasions, should be a wake-up call for politicians: it is a reform widely supported across the parliamentary spectrum; it affects a significant proportion of the population; and it does not require a great deal of resources.

Let’s start with the figures to put the scale and social significance of the issue into perspective. In Italy, there are around 4 million older people with severely reduced independence in their daily activities, of whom 1 million require care or aids. If we include the families bearing the burden of care (caregivers) and the healthcare professionals who provide professional care for older people, the total number of people involved rises to 10 million. And, given demographic trends, this is a group that is inevitably set to grow: over the next ten years, the population aged over 85 will increase by 30 per cent.

As regards the funds to be allocated to implementing the reform, the ‘Pact for a New Welfare System’ estimates a budget of around 1 billion for 2027. The effort involved is organisational and administrative rather than purely financial, as the aim is to streamline bureaucracy, reform the current home care service by adapting it to the needs of frail older people, invest in the accessibility of residential care homes, and tailor direct financial support to the level of need. In essence, this is a genuine welfare reform. From this perspective, it is a longer and more complicated process to implement than simply handing out a bonus, but one with a deeper and more lasting impact on society. After all, it is paradoxical that politicians should decide to spend around 1.5 billion to give two months’ pension to those aged 65, rather than using that money to support those who are not self-sufficient at the age of 85. It is the exact opposite of how the welfare system should be designed in a country that is ageing and is already the oldest on the Old Continent.

Placing a major social issue such as dependency at the heart of the forthcoming Budget Bill could be a way for politicians to consider both future generations and the next elections. If the right and the left have managed to launch this reform together, why don’t Meloni and Schlein commit to seeing it through together?