After the scorching heat of recent days, yesterday’s rain gave us a few degrees of relief and the illusion — sweet and fleeting, as all August illusions are — that we might finally breathe easy. But anyone familiar with the corridors of the Republic knows that the real political climate never cools down: it looks calm on paper, but stays scalding beneath the surface.
That much is clear from the bulletins circulating among council members’ desks, the same friends who write to us and who, in various capacities, keep a column in these pages: calm is an outfit that photographs well in official portraits, less so in private conversations.
And while the summer lull, spent between beach umbrellas and village festivals, seems to be drawing to a close, the banner of the Christian Democratic Party (Pdcs) is being raised high. The weekend ahead is one for the record books: the visit of Pope Leo XIV — the third papal visit in San Marino’s history, following John Paul II in 1982 and Benedict XVI in 2011 — coincides with the opening of the Rimini Meeting and the Pdcs’s Festa dell’Amicizia (Friendship Festival) in Piazza Bertoldi. A matter of calendar coincidence, certainly, but also the perfect opportunity for the relative majority party to showcase its two burning issues for the coming autumn: Europe and healthcare.
On Europe, the calm restored after the signing of the Association Agreement is more apparent than real. The country continues to debate whether or not to hold a referendum, with reactions ranging from genuine concern to complete indifference. Some, like the Dml (Domani Motus Liberi), see it as a non-negotiable democratic duty and dismiss any talk of postponement as a move that smacks of fear of the popular verdict. Others, from the majority benches, point out that San Marino’s Declaration of Citizens’ Rights and certain rulings by the country’s guarantors suggest the agreement is not properly subject to a referendum in the first place. And then there’s the Csdl (Confederazione Sammarinese del Lavoro), whose proposal for a consultative referendum suggests taking the necessary time — even two years — to properly inform citizens before asking them to decide. Three legitimate readings of the same issue, with no definitive verdict in sight: a classic case of San Marino’s political class preferring to argue over method rather than confront substance.
To be fair, majority leaders also make a sensible point: San Marino’s European chapter doesn’t close with a signature — it opens with one. What’s needed now, as they like to say in an expression fast becoming a fixture of local political jargon, is to “put in place” the foundations for tomorrow. From Palazzo Begni, home to the Foreign Affairs Secretariat, word is that work is moving quickly to ensure the country isn’t caught unprepared when it comes to implementing the Agreement. But there’s another reason for the urgency, less openly stated yet just as real: the ruling coalition’s partners, quiet on the surface, are actually eager to give this legislature room to breathe and, if possible, carry it through to its natural end. In politics, silence is rarely empty.
While the European question stirs passions and sets deadlines, the Pdcs is also putting healthcare on the table, with Massimo Andrea Ugolini, who took over the Secretariat mid-term and is already tackling the many long-standing problems weighing on what was once the Republic’s crown jewel. The majority credits him with the ability to deliver on the government’s programme; the opposition, which criticised his move from the Justice portfolio, sees things quite differently. Only results will tell who’s right — but only if he’s given the room to act without constant pressure breathing down his neck. We hope he is, because on healthcare, the country can no longer afford further delays.
But while these issues dominate squares and palazzos, the everyday life of San Marino’s citizens keeps demanding answers that make less noise than a referendum, yet weigh just as heavily. The family law remains pending, particularly regarding maternity and paternity leave, as fifty-five mothers made unmistakably clear when they refused to simply wait in silence. The economy wants to regain its competitive edge: Anis is waiting for VAT reform, while shopkeepers and small and medium-sized businesses continue to complain about red tape that shows no sign of easing. Young people and the elderly alike, each in their own way, feel left out of the agenda. Meanwhile, the quiet machinery of appointment guessing games for top public administration posts has started up again: the General Directorate of the Civil Service has been filled, but vacancies remain at the University, with more expected to open, according to rumours reaching our newsroom.
The question, then, is not whether the country has too many open issues — it always has, and that’s actually a sign of a living community. The real question is whether there’s genuine planning behind these issues, or whether we’re simply getting through each day chasing the emergency of the moment. We put that question to the many friends who write to us and read us every morning.
To be clear, the country is doing well, and it is not our intention to complain for the sake of it. But our task is to shine a light where it struggles to reach, to open up debate, not shut it down. There is a strand of politics that insists everything is fine, and another that cries disaster. We believe in a third way, less comfortable than either: one of open eyes, shared planning, and collective improvement. Journalism, after all, is much the same thing: a strong morning espresso that helps you open your eyes.
To our readers, we wish a good day, and we invite you to step outside the camps of “everything’s wonderful” or “everything’s terrible.” Because whatever the temperature outside, it always pays to keep your eyes on reality.
