A comprehensive timeline for transposing European legislation, with clearly defined responsibilities and checks on public administration resources. This is what Commissioner Carlotta Andruccioli (D-ML) called for during the joint committee session of 12 October, also raising the issue of guarantees for the role of the Grand and General Council (Consiglio Grande e Generale). Below is her full statement.
“I read carefully through the notes sent a few days ago. They contain important information about the work carried out, but, as other colleagues have noted, they also highlight numerous activities still underway: political decisions yet to be made, consultations yet to be completed, and working groups yet to be set up. My first question is this: is there an overall roadmap for transposing the acquis that sets out, for each annex, all the planned phases, those responsible, legislative deadlines and priorities? Is this work considered a priority by all the Secretariats of State? I would also like to understand when operational planning began for each annex, because one of the issues our party has been raising for many months – and which several commissioners have echoed today – is delay. In the document, the March 2027 deadline recurs for numerous areas, yet these show very different levels of progress. In some cases regulatory proposals are being drafted, in others there are only technical discussions underway, or political decisions have yet to be taken. I’m thinking of social security and energy. What is the basis for expecting the March 2027 deadline to be met, if some of this work is still at an early stage or requires political decisions? Has an assessment been carried out? The document refers to working groups, authorities, external consultants, departments and Secretariats, but it does not provide a clear picture of the resources deployed, the skills available and required, or the expected workload. The preparedness of the administration is a central issue – perhaps the one closest to my heart, since I see certain difficulties firsthand. What is needed goes well beyond three afternoons of training on European history and values, which, as I have said before, are interesting but not very useful in practical terms. Transposition will involve the public administration and will require specific expertise. What stage has the review carried out by the Directorate General for Public Administration (Funzione Pubblica) and the government reached regarding the various offices? Has it been verified that they have the staff and resources needed to meet deadlines without compromising day-to-day operations? Is there an updated version of the report presented several months ago on strengthening staffing levels, training, and additional assignments? Today Secretary Belluzzi tells us that the document will be updated and that the review has identified offices which the agreement will not significantly affect – meaning no additional resources will be needed – and others that will require more staff or different profiles. We are told new functions and new authorities will be established; there has been talk of antitrust matters and the possibility of creating a shared administrative structure for the authorities. Are we still at the reflection stage, one week before signing and two and a half months before ratification and entry into force, or are we further along? If we are further along, can we share the assessments on staffing needs and new functions? That is what we expect to hear today, rather than talk of what we will do, what we would like to do, or reflections still underway on which rules to transpose and how the administration’s operations will change. There are many issues to address. The Secretary mentioned the procurement law, an example close to my heart since I work in that sector. What are the latest updates? We are told it will be drafted with an eye to opportunities, enabling businesses to operate within the European framework and cutting red tape. I took that for granted, since it should be the goal regardless. I would like to know how things are moving forward: is there a working group? Are the various contracting authorities being consulted and involved? As far as I know, they are not, but I believe it is essential to engage with those who do this work every day. I see this firsthand through my work at the ISS (Social Security Institute), and I believe we are already partly aligning with European regulations. The purchase of medical equipment and instruments looks to Italy and Europe – it is not a domestic market. At least from the ISS side, in many respects we are already transposing certain directives, or we are already oriented outward, both in approach and in practice. The procurement law nonetheless remains one of the crucial issues: where do things stand, and will there be genuine involvement of the contracting authorities? There is also talk of financial services, capital, state aid, customs and trade policy. From what I understand, no working groups are yet active on these strategic matters. Why haven’t they been set up yet? What is the timetable for launching them, and who will be responsible? Councillor Bugli pointed to the need for coordinated action among the Secretariats of State. Who will coordinate the various working groups, and who will step in in case of delays, overlaps, or political decisions still to be made? Is there a body or Secretariat with the authority and responsibility to ensure that transposition is genuinely treated as a priority by everyone? I would also like to understand the role of the joint committee, which, as I understand it, acts as a filtering mechanism. Who will actually be responsible for the political coordination of the transposition process? As many colleagues have said, it is important at every stage to consult economic and professional categories, especially since several areas involve professional bodies and technical organisations. Is there a structured consultation schedule for all the relevant categories, to ensure the rules comply with the EU acquis and are applicable in the San Marino context? Forgive me for so many questions. My fellow party member isn’t even here today, so I’m taking the opportunity to use a bit of his time as well, but I consider this discussion important. Another issue close to my heart is social security. I understand there are discussions underway between the Health Department and the ISS on moving beyond the 1974 bilateral agreement with Italy. What are the main issues still to be resolved, and what organisational and operational aspects have already been assessed? I also believe it is essential to continuously monitor progress. The roadmap should include regular updates on the state of implementation. It is important that the government periodically provides the committees with a report indicating what has already been adopted, what is being drafted, what still requires political decisions, and what measures are behind schedule. I have asked many questions, but I consider them all essential. I will close with a few remarks on the draft bill. As legislators, we must ask ourselves a question also raised by others: the goal is to make transposition faster and leaner, but with what democratic, institutional, parliamentary and administrative safeguards? I very much agree with my colleague Mularoni on the need to look at positive examples from other countries, drawing especially on smaller nations that have gone through this same process. We must avoid clogging up Parliament’s work, properly examine the content brought forward for ratification – for which we currently lack the necessary tools – and ensure a well-structured organisation. In principle, I consider an annual planning measure to be useful. The question is what kind of planning actually lies behind it, and how the role of the Grand and General Council is valued within it. Articles 4, 5 and 6 raise some concerns for me: how do we guarantee that the Council retains a genuine role in substantive decisions, rather than simply ratifying texts that have already been finalised? What guarantees are there? There are many open questions here too. It is good that the Secretary clarified that we are still at the discussion stage and that the proposal is not yet final. Finding a transposition mechanism will be essential, but on certain points I believe we should take a step back and put more work into proper planning. I won’t go into the referendum issue, which for us remains the preceding step: our position on that has not changed.”
