The family law has passed, but the opposition remains on the sidelines. No votes against, but no yeses either: Rete, Repubblica Futura and Domani – Motus Liberi all chose to abstain. This is probably the most interesting political fact to emerge from the day’s session in the Grand and General Council (Consiglio Grande e Generale).
The measure, in other words, does not divide the chamber on the merits of individual provisions, many of which are recognized as positive even by the minority parties. The real gap opens instead over the overall scope of the reform. For the majority, this is a first qualitative leap in family policy; for the opposition, it is a useful package, but still too small compared to the enormous problem of declining birth rates.
The debate over the 1,000-euro baby bonus captures this distance well. The contribution is granted for every child born or adopted from January 1, 2026, subject to a net per-capita income threshold of 25,000 euros. D-ML had wanted much higher figures: 3,000 euros for a first child and 5,000 for subsequent ones. RF, meanwhile, challenged the income criterion and proposed concrete forms of support instead, such as diapers and formula milk up to age two.
The majority held its ground. Guerrino Zanotti of Libera pointed out that a per-capita threshold of 25,000 euros means a family of three could have a combined income of up to 75,000 euros, and urged colleagues to view the bonus within the context of the entire package of measures. Even the government, however, stopped short of declaring the measure untouchable: Stefano Canti left open the possibility of revisiting it once its effects have been assessed.
And this is precisely where the political compromise built around the law becomes visible. The majority secured passage of the measure without backing down on its overall framework, but it did incorporate some ideas put forward by the minority parties. This happened with nursery and cafeteria fees, where reference to the ICEE (equivalent economic situation indicator) was reinstated, and it happened during the debate itself on support for single-parent households: the 50-euro monthly contribution will now be credited to the Smac Card, following a change worked out directly during the floor debate.
On other points, political conflict all but disappeared. This was the case with the provision allowing time off work to care for a sick child, extended to the self-employed as well, with 100% coverage up to the child’s 14th birthday. Here, positive assessments came even from RF, D-ML and Rete, albeit with calls to further extend the age range.
The real battle returned in the explanations of vote. D-ML described a law with positive elements, but “not sufficient,” since housing, cost of living, jobs, schools and services remain fundamental pieces of the problem. RF spoke of “partial satisfaction” and accused the government of pursuing a policy “that follows events rather than anticipating them.” Rete acknowledged progress on several fronts—from caregiver recognition to smart working and parental leave—but considered the law “superficial in relation to a genuine analysis of the crisis.”
The majority’s reading was, unsurprisingly, quite different. The PSD spoke of a “breath of fresh air” for families, Libera called it “an important step forward,” while Alleanza Riformista placed particular emphasis on the recognition of caregivers. The PDCS, through Manuel Ciavatta, in turn claimed credit for a law built through dialogue with the opposition, trade unions and business associations—one capable of giving families both greater financial support and more time.
In the end, then, the majority secured its flagship law without facing outright confrontation. The opposition parties stopped short of voting no because they recognized measures within the text that they support and, in some cases, helped shape. But they also avoided voting yes, unwilling to hand the government a full political victory.
The message emerging from the chamber is fairly clear: there is far more common ground on individual protections than the political rhetoric suggests; it is on the overall response to declining birth rates that the majority and opposition continue to travel on separate tracks. For the government, this law is a concrete starting point. For the minority parties, it is merely the first piece of a much larger effort that has yet to truly begin.
