After Repubblica Futura, RETE too is challenging the new rules on the information Councillors can obtain from the Central Bank. “What game are the government and majority playing?”
Delegated decree number 134 of 7 September, which governs official secrecy over information and data held by the Central Bank, has earned itself a second opponent. After Repubblica Futura, which had called for its withdrawal, it is now RETE stepping in.
The contested point is this: the Finance Commission can obtain information, but cannot disclose it as long as confidentiality requirements remain in place.
This is a choice that, the movement writes, “directly affects the institutional prerogatives of Councillors in exercising their oversight function” and would therefore have deserved “a preliminary discussion among political forces and a public explanation of the reasons and consequences.” A discussion that, RETE notes, never took place.
Hence the fundamental question: how effective can the Council’s political oversight be if the information obtained remains subject to such strict constraints? Councillors, the movement recalls, are also elected to oversee the government’s actions and hold it accountable for the decisions it makes.
The contradiction with the majority’s own resolution
The sharpest criticism, however, concerns the consistency of those in power.
RETE recalls that it was the majority itself, through a formal resolution (Ordine del Giorno), that asked Secretary of State for Finance and Budget, Transport and Energy Marco Gatti to bring greater clarity to the banking system.
“These are the contradictions of an inconsistent majority,” the comment reads: “on one hand it calls for greater clarity, on the other it backs measures that introduce constraints and less transparency toward Councillors.”
A question of timing
There is also the matter of when the measure arrives, which the movement describes as suspiciously well-timed — a “timing” that raises questions.
In the background lies the attempted sale of Banca di San Marino, a matter that a Commission of Inquiry has been working on for months and which, RETE recalls, will soon go to trial. It is precisely this affair that “has shown how heavily the lack of transparency weighs on our banking system.”
“Right at the moment when the Central Bank is being asked questions about the reasons behind its actions, are limits being placed on its answers?” the movement asks.
The question of the decree’s true nature remains open, given that its stated rationale invokes international standards and the European legal framework. For RETE, the question is whether those provisions are “genuinely necessary to comply with European and international standards,” or whether they will “only have the effect of preventing Councillors from fully exercising their function.”
The closing line is a direct jab: “Is this what transparency looks like? What game are the government and majority playing? RETE and the public want to know.”
