Meloni and the possibility of keeping the deficit at 3.1 per cent. No to a deviation

She says this in the evening, when Meloni’s thoughts become as sharp as shards of broken glass. Standing by the lampshade, Meloni says: “I risk handing over a country with its finances in order and failing to reap the rewards of all this work over the years.” Immediately afterwards, as if to make amends, she adds: “Elections can be won or lost, but once credibility is lost, you cannot regain it. I don’t want to lose it.” It is then that she dispels the spectres of those asking her to deviate from the budget. Meloni does not want to do so, and perhaps cannot even. On 22 September, Istat will release the updated figures on public finances, and the deficit-to-GDP ratio could—it is a possibility—still remain above three per cent; and by just a few decimal places—the usual 0.1 per cent—lies the constraint of our shame.

Sources report that Salvini, for one, whenever he meets Meloni—except when he is busy with the Russian ambassador in Milan—suggests deviating from the budget. He urges Meloni to ignore Europe and its rules, because ‘after all, it’s our last year in government – do we want to win or not?’. Meloni then looks at him tenderly, as if to explain, ‘do you understand why we’re different?’. When the good news began to circulate that Istat would reward the well-managed accounts, and that the deficit-to-GDP ratio, ahead of schedule, would settle below three per cent (currently at 3.01 per cent), MPs from the League and Forza Italia began talking about a fifty-billion budget, and about raising pensions. Marco Osnato, FdI’s Quintino Sella and chairman of the Finance Committee, says that “if we were below three per cent, little would change. It would merely mean an early exit from the infringement procedure. I want to remain optimistic. Let us always remember the state in which previous governments left the public finances.” The Citizenship Income that Conte is reviving, and the budget weighed down by the Superbonus, is that “shameful constraint” which, as Carlo Ginzburg might write, is a “bond stronger than love”. According to the Ministry of Economy and Finance’s official forecasts, exit from the procedure is expected in 2027. Giorgetti, speaking in Cernobbio, stated that he would “not make a big deal” of not exiting the procedure. The paradox would be to hand over a financially restored country to a left-wing government. Meloni, and this happens to her with increasing frequency, says: “Credibility isn’t coming back …”. A reliable source recalls that ill-fated afternoon this summer, when Edmondo Cirielli, the FdI Deputy Minister for Foreign Affairs, dared to suggest to Vannacci that an alliance might be possible. Cirielli received a call from Meloni – the sort that makes one blush once and for all. Within FdI, after that phone call, it was clear that Vannacci was never to be mentioned again, nor was any convergence to be even considered.

Meloni explains, when asked about this general, that it is not possible to form an alliance with someone who wants to replace you, and that tactics can even be fatal, adding that “the simplest solution is not always the best. ‘Credibility is what counts.’ She also finds it amusing to listen to the local journalists – whom she holds in high regard, let’s be clear – such as Giordano and Cruciani, who urge her to form an alliance with Vannacci; and with the same grace, in a low voice, Meloni reflects that journalists may change their minds because that is the nature of debate, but what is left for a politician? In that same frame of mind, she returns to the topic of orderly public finances and the low spread – which perhaps means nothing, but which, for the markets, is everything. Having a low spread allows one to say: we are a country that can pay its debts and therefore a country to which money can still be lent. It means paying less interest on the debt and having more resources to spend – though obviously not in the short term. On the subject of Russia too – which for Salvini boils down to meetings and aperitifs – for Meloni it is instead about freedom, because, she believes, no amount of Russian gas is worth as much as a nation’s sovereignty and freedom. The same applies to the public finances. This explains why Meloni currently rejects the idea of a budget deviation or a ‘handout’ budget. She reasons and asks herself, much like in Anglo-Saxon theatre: without an expansionary budget, we may lose the election, but if we win, having wrecked the public finances, we lose our credibility. It is this special elixir that Meloni savours – credibility that offers her solace. It is clearly a risk. Credibility could turn into a painful mockery, with the left reaping the benefits – at the right’s expense – of these four years of prudence. On 22 September, Istat, in its independence, may add bitterness to this ordeal which Meloni has so far weathered with composure: “Elections can be won or lost, but once you lose credibility, it never returns.” It takes very little to veer off course: just one decimal place.