Roccella: “Vannacci’s programme is confused and contradictory. His proposals on the family? Ideological.”

Rome. Minister Eugenia Roccella, they want to rename your ministry. What do you think? “To begin with, I think Roberto Vannacci’s programme is confused and contradictory on just about everything.” Really? No common ground at all? “With him? I find it hard to see where we might agree.”

Futuro Nazionale publishes the second part of the programme. And it is above all on the topics of family and birth rates that the Vannaccians have devoted the bulk of their efforts. Of the entire voluminous text, no fewer than sixteen pages are dedicated to this subject. Here, amongst other things, the General proposes reinstating the Ministry for the Family under a new name: ‘Life, Natural Family and Identity’. No ‘Equal Opportunities’. But why? “I have always maintained,” replies Roccella, the minister in charge of the department, “that the three portfolios – Equal Opportunities, Birth Rates and Family – are inextricably linked.” Equal Opportunities, which are not the same as ‘equality’, stem precisely from the recognition of difference. And it is impossible to address the birth rate – which, despite the measures taken, is not increasing in any country – unless we start with equal opportunities for women. You see, it is a matter of knowing how to interpret international data. And of having a clear political programme’. And what is Vannacci’s programme? ‘It is a highly ideological text’. Why do you think so? “Because of his confused view of the relationship between men and women, for example. On this issue, Vannacci appears to be clear and uncompromising: he despises feminism, he invokes patriarchy…”. And yet? “And yet he is fighting without having a clear idea of what difference actually is.”

Could you give us an example? “Yes. When he talks about the offence of femicide, arguing that murder is already sufficient, he justifies his position by saying he does not want to draw a distinction between categories. As if men and women were simply categories rather than issues deeply linked to the sexualised body. The point, you see, is that being a woman is not a social category. The specific offence, in fact, has an entirely different basis.”

It is true, Minister, that one need not be a Vannacci supporter to recognise a certain… originality in this new offence. Does using the term ‘femicide’ not contradict the principle of equality? Why would it be a more serious offence than others? “The problem lies in the specific nature revealed by the data. These figures show a vast disparity between the number of men who kill women and the number of women who kill men. Vannacci, in such cases, speaks of crimes of passion. But the issue is linked to difference. I doubt he fully understands what that means.”

Fn did not invent the multiple vote for parents of large families. However, she is putting it forward again. Does it convince you? “To be honest, I think representation is a sensitive issue. I understand the reasoning behind this proposal because I believe parenthood should be valued and that motherhood is a ‘social value’, but I would be cautious: the vote is a personal matter.”

From the ‘parenting allowance’ to the ‘rebirth allowance’, there are countless proposals concerning the nuclear family. There is even an exemption from the Rai licence fee for families with three children… Are these proposals that the ‘faded right’, as he calls it, hadn’t thought of? “No. Many of these objectives are contradictory or self-serving. If for no other reason than the government has already put them in place. I’m thinking simply of the increase in the universal child allowance, surrogacy, the ban on mobile phone use at school, and the expansion of nursery fee reimbursements. As for the rest, what can I say? There’s a funding issue that Vannacci doesn’t address. But he has also stated this: for him, funding is a secondary issue, of an accounting nature rather than a political one. He struggles to understand that when one chooses one measure over another, one does so also in light of what is available. It is called a political choice. And it means coming to terms with funding, with existing laws, and with Constitutional Court rulings which one may not like but which exist. I repeat: his is a quest for consensus.”

But perhaps the government, just as you have on other issues, will change too. Or will it? “No. This government hasn’t changed. Rather, it has grappled with the practical difficulty of changing things. It seems to me the General is merely waving flags. As for the quality of his flags…”. Roccella seems to be drawing a veil over the matter. “He’s against quotas,” the minister continues, “but then he introduces ‘azurre’ quotas. He declares himself against Europe but doesn’t give the slightest thought to how to improve it. Change takes effort.” Yet he wants to change children’s education through the telly: no more ‘homophilia’ from 6 am to 11 pm. “And yet he claims to be in favour of freedom of speech and the abolition of the Mancino law.” Our main concern, if anything, is the obsolescence of the medium itself. Perhaps children watch YouTubers rather than Sanremo? “We are the only ones in Italy to have introduced age verification – in other words, an effective ban – for pornographic websites, given that the age of first exposure had dropped to six.” St Thomas is often quoted in the programme. You’re Catholic. Will that at least please you? “I’m very sparing with quotations. Our Christian roots are part of our identity; they shape our outlook. That’s precisely why I believe that flaunting them serves no purpose.”