Rete is once again on the attack over the reform of the Council’s Standing Orders (Regolamento consiliare), which has returned to the Chamber for its second reading. The movement’s main target remains the so-called “guillotine” clause — a mechanism that would allow, after a set period of time, the discussion of articles to be closed and any remaining unexamined amendments to be grouped together into a single vote.
“The text amending the Council’s Standing Orders, now before the Chamber for its second reading, contains a passage that amounts to a genuine assault on parliamentary democracy,” said Rete’s group leader. According to the movement, the revision work carried out by the majority is still not enough to fully safeguard councillors’ prerogatives.
Rete does, however, acknowledge the steps back taken from the original version of the proposal. “The most objectionable rules have been struck from the original legislative framework — those that cut speaking times and even went so far as to introduce a preliminary screening of amendments,” the statement reads. What remains to be removed, though, is what the movement calls “the disgrace of the so-called guillotine.”
“In other words, for a misguided notion of efficiency in the Chamber’s proceedings, debate is being ‘cut short,’ drastically limiting a democratic tool available to the opposition — whichever it may be — and, at times, to the majority as well, which, once the imposed time runs out, would be denied the political space needed to make any kind of contribution,” Rete states.
The movement also points out that the use of this mechanism could have consequences for the parties currently making up the majority. “Today this shortcut may seem convenient to those in government, but in politics, sooner or later, everyone ends up in opposition. Limiting the democratic prerogatives of parliamentary debate is, in our view, a serious mistake.”
According to Rete, extending the length of debate is one of the tools available to opposition parties to force governments and majorities into genuine dialogue. “On several occasions over the years, it was precisely the opposition’s work — through debate and the tabling of amendments — that uncovered hidden problems, brought critical issues to light, and exposed overreach and decisions that needed to be stopped or radically corrected.”
Among its examples, the movement recalls the debates over the Budget Laws (Leggi finanziarie), the Des [Economic Development Department] affair, and the matters linked to financier Francesco Confuorti. “The fact that some gagging measures have been removed from the text gives us no reassurance at all, unless the circle is closed by also stripping out this shameful ‘guillotine’,” the statement continues.
“Before writing into the Standing Orders a tool that blocks debate and limits democratic confrontation, we need to think this through very carefully. Debate is not wasted time. You cannot put a timer on democracy, or you risk causing serious damage to the system of democratic safeguards,” Rete concludes, announcing that it will continue to challenge the measure in the Chamber and expressing hope that members of the majority will also speak out.
