Skip to main content

Reducción de las Provincias en Italia

El gobierno italiano aprobó el miércoles 31 de octubre de 2012 una ley que estipula la reducción del número de provincias a mitad. Esta medida intenta reducir el alto coste de las administraciones regionales. No está claro todavía los ahorros que resultarán, pero lo que está claro es que con la implementación de este plan, los problemas de ineficiencia y altos costes van a estar abordados.

El objetivo de esta medida viene en un momento crítico de la economía italiana, donde la deuda llega a 126% del PIB, junto con una percepción general de administraciones locales ineficientes y costosas. Desde un punto de vista económico y administrativo, es un plan lógico y necesario.

El problema con este plan es la reacción de los ciudadanos locales de las provincias que se van a ajuntar con otras provincias, y las consecuencias directas a su representación y participación en los gobiernos locales. La división original de territorio a 86 provincias debería haber sido basado a temas relacionas a eficiencia en ofrecer servicios, a divisiones étnicas-culturales, representación y participación óptima de los ciudadanos en sus entornos, o cualquier otro parámetro que justificaba esta división. Suponiendo que es una división cultural, donde los habitantes de una provincia disfrutan un patrimonio cultural en particular y lo promueven  a través los programas e incitativas fundados, por parte, de sus impuestos, ¿cómo van a reaccionar con la decisión de una fusión con otra provincia vecina?

Esta siempre bien reformar la administración pública y corregir las malas decisiones tomadas en gobiernos anteriores, y un cierto nivel de sacrificio en tiempos de crisis está también entendido, pero creo que el gobierno central debe tomar en cuenta los ciudadanos de estas provincias y el impacto que la ley va a tener en su entendimiento a su papel, partenencia y poder, en su entrono.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Just as Orwell Said

         George Orwell said in his famous book 1984 that “first they steal the words, then they steal the meaning”, accurately foreseeing the political actions of world leaders and their manipulation of public opinion. His words are ever so precise once one examines the vocabulary applied by a number of world leaders when describing the policies and regimes of troubling countries: axis of evil, war on terror, terrorist killers, harbourers of fundamentalism etc. Ironic it is to see how those who were once described to have been allies with Satan himself seem to show good will in a matter of very few years. Iran is one very good example of this. The Persian nation has come out as a winner in the Geneva talks that were held in October, where not only did it get applauded for the concessions it offered, but it also ensured the west’s acceptance of its regional weight. Everyone seems to be more relaxed after the negotiations and a new round of talks has been set for November.  

Pan-Arabism vs. Middle Easternism?

             A rab Nationalism, a romantic concept that moved poets to write ballads, intellectuals to preach volumes, activists to passionately organize and the masses to cheer freedom. A concept introduced by students at the American University of Beirut in the last phases of the ageing Ottoman Empire and studied in secret societies. This concept developed and led, under western planning, to the Great Arab Revolt in 1916. The slogans of Arab revival and freedom from Ottoman tyranny swept the Arab nations, where hopes of independence and self-rule were promised by the restoration of Arab control over the area. Then problems arose. Who are Arabs? What is an Aran nation? How does it extend geographically? Is it an area that encompasses people who speak the same language and share the same history? If so, why did the Lebanese Maronites reject the concept of Arab nationalism and insist on a Lebanese identity? Why did the Egyptians hesitate before including themselves under th

Wishing You a New MENA

Journalist and author of A nd Then All Hell Broke Loose: Two Decades in the Middle East   said that “Everything changed with the First World War. The Middle East was reorganized, redefined, and the seeds were planted for a century of bloodshed.” He was not entirely right. Bloodshed lasted more than a century actually. Here we are in 2019, and the Middle East and North Africa region – the infamous MENA – is still a boisterous, rowdy zone of political recrimination, military coups, conspiracy theories, historic reminiscence, oil squabbles, and religiously-infused rhetoric. Blood shed of course as well. Well, here we are.  Algeria is set to head to the polls in April. President Abdelaziz Bouteflika will likely secure a fifth mandate. If not, Algeria’s powerbrokers, mainly the military and powerful business elites will enter into an expensive bargain of security versus social and economic stability. Having vested the long-enjoyed tranquillity on a political figure, rather than a