Meloni in the Chamber, here’s what he said about the shipwreck of Cutro

It’s just after 3 pm when Giorgia Meloni takes the Deputies Chamber for question time. The theme of the day is migrants. On the other side of the hemicycle on the opposition bench is the newly elected secretary of the Democratic Party, Elly Schlein. The attention is all for the two prima donnas of Montecitorio. The deputy Magi takes care of the first question. “Meloni, Cutro shipwreck in the Sar Libya area”, then he adds: “Our Coast Guard must be respected and our government has a clear conscience”. You certainly argue and attack: “For political purposes, one ends up questioning who saves lives and slandering the whole of Italy.” «We must prevent traffickers and invest in legal routes, our conscience is clear. I hope that those who attack the government and say nothing about the smugglers can say the same», concludes the Prime Minister in response to the parliamentarian and secretary of +E Riccardo Magi who certainly does not allow himself to be “convinced” by the response of the prime minister and replies: «The the government should ask its European partners for a European rescue operation for migrants in the Mediterranean, because it is time to end the farce of the Libyan Sar” and he plunges the knife: “It is time to end the farce of the Libyan Sar; the Libyans are unable to operate rescues according to international standards. The right approach is not the one you said, in an absurd reversal of roles, when you asked “do you really believe that the government wanted to drown the shipwrecked people of Cutro?”; rather we have to ask ourselves “Did we do everything to save lives?” respecting our Constitution. You should ask your European partners for a joint operation and you would have more credibility to ask for it if the government operated like this”. So far the migrants and the tragedy of Cutro. Then the themes slide towards the Mes, the ecological transition and the new regulations on green houses in Europe. And here, Giorgia Meloni is clear: «A government approach based on environmental sustainability does not prevent us from making critical assessments of community legislative initiatives which, in our opinion, if they are not appropriately remodulated, risk damaging our economic fabric: it is the case, for example, of the proposal for a directive on so-called green houses”. And you explain starting from the fact that the text approved in Europe “in our opinion provides for temporal objectives that are not achievable for Italy”. Because, «the real estate assets are placed in a different context from other member states for historical reasons, of geographical conformation. The Italian negotiating action in the European Council had made it possible to review the timing of the adjustment of the energy performance of buildings to make them more gradual and less stringent and in order to guarantee the possibility of exemption for some categories. With yesterday’s vote, the European Parliament decided to further tighten the initial text and this choice, which we consider unreasonable, moved by an ideological approach, requires the government to continue fighting to defend the interests of citizens and the nation”. Then on the transition front you clarified: «Cars? We are following the path of technological neutrality to combine development-sustainability even with synthetic fuels».