Editorials
The ruling party’s contortions over military spending
In the resolution passed by Parliament, the centre-right parties ask the government whether it is correct to say that the Safe scheme is worthwhile. But the assessment has already been carried out: not by Brussels, but by the government itself
The Minister for the Economy, Giancarlo Giorgetti, in the Chamber of Deputies during his statement on the launch of the procedure to activate the safeguard clause – photo: LaPresse
The majority resolution passed yesterday in the Chamber of Deputies contains a cautious formulation: it commits the government to assessing the use of Safe, but only ‘where deemed advantageous overall’. In essence, it asks the government to assess whether European defence loans are more cost-effective than standard forms of state financing. The problem is that this assessment has already been carried out. And not by Brussels or the opposition, but by the government itself, in two official documents.
A document corresponds to the latest Public Finance Document, drafted by the Ministry of the Economy and approved by the entire Council of Ministers. The Public Finance Document states that SAFE offers financial advantages over standard sovereign debt issues: it benefits from the terms secured from the European Union, provides for maturities of up to 45 years and a ten-year grace period before principal repayment. The second is the Ministry of Defence’s 2025–2027 Multi-Annual Policy Document. The introduction, signed by Guido Crosetto, contains an even clearer statement: SAFE enables the modernisation of the armed forces to be financed in a manner that is ‘more advantageous than ordinary public debt’.
The issue, therefore, is simple. Safe does not offer grants: it offers loans, which must be repaid and used in accordance with specific European conditions. One can debate which programmes to fund, how much funding to request, the timelines and the industrial constraints. But one cannot pretend that the government has not yet determined whether the instrument is worthwhile. The Ministry of Economy and Finance has already stated this. The Ministry of Defence has already stated this. The Council of Ministers has already approved it. The wording included in the resolution serves to gloss over a political problem: keeping together those in the majority who want to use Safe and those, particularly in the League, who continue to view it with suspicion. The result: Parliament is committing the government to assess what the government has already assessed. This is not fiscal prudence. It is prudence in relations within the coalition.
