The sensible middle ground amid the hysteria surrounding Vannacci lies in a piece of advice from Giorgetti

V for victory. V for virus. V for escape route. V for ‘begone’. V for Vannacci. The V that has been causing the centre-right leadership such anguish for weeks is the one that happens to be the first letter of the surname of Italy’s most dramatically famous general. What should be done about Vannacci? Should we ally ourselves with him? Should we not? Should we ignore him? Should we respond? Do we attack him? Do we keep a close eye on him? Do we leave him to his fate? And if we don’t form an alliance, how do we win? And if we don’t win, what then? In the frenzied, feverish cauldron of summer politics, all manner of suggestions are reaching Giorgia Meloni’s ears. Form an alliance – you’ll end up having to deal with him anyway. Don’t form an alliance – because then he’ll come after you. Rely on tactical voting – after all, right-wing voters don’t want the left to win. Don’t rely on tactical voting, because otherwise you risk crashing and burning, losing or, worse still, making things worse. The most interesting, thought-provoking and intelligent advice offered to Giorgia Meloni at this moment comes from a cautious, prudent and often wise politician named Giancarlo Giorgetti. Giorgetti, as we know, isn’t exactly the sort of politician who grinds out results, builds support and generates consensus. But over the years he has learnt to navigate not only the narrow passages of public finances but also the rugged paths of politics. And the Giorgetti proposal – a proposal worth embracing, at least in part – goes something like this. Dear Giorgia, we cannot under any circumstances consider allying ourselves with Vannacci. It’s unthinkable. It’s madness. It’s unthinkable for the League – as you know – which would be even more vulnerable to a loss of support. It’s unthinkable for Forza Italia – and you know this too – which would risk not so much being ousted from the coalition – something unthinkable and impossible – but becoming unpalatable to many moderate voters looking for a leader. Ultimately, dear Giorgia, having Vannacci in the coalition would be complicated for you too. It’s true that, on paper, we could win the election. But this is also something that needs to be considered: not only what we are prepared to lose – in terms of the coalition’s identity – but also how many votes you yourself are prepared to lose, because a Vannacci outside the coalition would pay the price of tactical voting, whilst a Vannacci within the coalition – in your view, having taken votes away from the League – which other party would he take them from, if not Fratelli d’Italia?

So far, everything is clear and straightforward, even elementary. But the Giorgetti ruling, like the devil, lies in the details. Giorgetti’s argument is that drafting a new electoral law may be unpalatable to some, but it is necessary for the coalition. Not only to try to win, but because under this electoral law – the current one – an alliance with Vannacci’s party would be necessary, almost mandatory. The reason is simple. Under the current electoral law, the Rosatellum, a third of the seats are allocated through single-member constituencies. This means that coalitions must field every possible candidate – and their opposites – in these constituencies to prevent them from falling to their opponents. Without Vannacci, under this electoral law, the centre-right would be doomed and would risk finding itself in a situation not dissimilar to that faced by the centre-left in 2022, when, by going into the election divided, it lost all or almost all of the single-member constituencies, handing the centre-right a majority so large that it enabled them to govern for four and a half years. Under the new electoral law, however, it is possible to attempt – whilst taking a small risk – a different, daring, courageous and perhaps necessary strategy. First step: go into the election with a united centre-right, without Vannacci, and try to capitalise on tactical voting to reach 42 per cent – the threshold above which the majority bonus is triggered – relying on the fact that Vannacci could take some votes away from the M5S and the Third Pole, in which Giorgia Meloni is taking a personal interest, could take some votes away from the PD. Second step: should no coalition reach the 42 per cent threshold, the electoral law (currently approved only by the Chamber of Deputies) becomes a proportional representation system. A three per cent threshold, and that’s it. It is within this framework that the Giorgetti plan comes into play: talks with Vannacci can take place after the elections, not before, so as to (a) avoid being cannibalised, (b) explore every avenue for tactical voting, and (c) discuss matters with him at a later stage if necessary. At the heart of this plan – going into the elections without Vannacci and assessing the situation afterwards – lies Meloni’s great hope: namely, that the Third Pole, with Carlo Calenda, Luigi Marattin and Pina Picierno, might not only siphon votes from the centre-left but also emerge as an alternative for the future. Yet the Giorgetti plan does have its own logic. No alliance with Vannacci; let’s continue to give him a hard time; let’s not panic; let’s approach the elections without hysteria; let’s play our cards right with the Budget Bill, in the belief that on 22 September Istat may revise last year’s deficit downwards, thus bringing it below three per cent, a condition that would allow us to consider a slightly expansionary budget this year. Let’s try to fulfil our role as the majority party, and if we fail to do so and our opponents haven’t won, we’ll have a way to save face: try to secure as many votes as possible and perhaps govern for the next five years without having Vannacci as Deputy Prime Minister. Simple and straightforward. Long live the Giorgetti ruling!