New clash Fitto-Corte dei conti on the fourth installment of the Pnrr: 16 billion at stake

New clash Fitto-Corte dei conti on the fourth installment of the Pnrr: 16 billion at stake

[ad_1]

The Court raises the alarm on the next deadline set for 30 June. But for the Minister of European Affairs “the assessment is the sole responsibility of the European Commission”

What between the Minister of European Affairs Raffaele Fitto and the Court of Auditors does not have good blood, it was already understood at the time of the long report of the body on the state of implementation of the Pnrr at the end of March. A text that sanctioned in detail the Italian difficulties in the ability to adapt to European deadlines, with which it is possible to access the installments of the Plan; and which sparked controversy inside and outside the government.

This time, it was the fuse the latest resolution of the Court, published last May 3, which raises the alarm on the next deadline set at the end of June. The Ministry of the Environment, responsible for the contracts for the construction of almost 7,000 new electric charging stations requested by Brussels, is in the dock. A planning activity – writes the Court – “resulted in deficit in these respects”. And which represents “a concrete risk of reducing the financial contribution made available by the EU”: a figure which amounts, in total, to 16 billion euros.

The minister who holds the Pnrr dossier did not like it. Indeed, he judged the Court’s opinion as an interference in the activity of the government: “The assessment of the ‘failure to achieve the European milestone’ it is the exclusive responsibility of the European Commission in dialogue with the member state”. Not at the organ in viale Mazzini, then. Which, in doing so, threatens to undermine “the correct relationship between the institutions”.

And yes, Fitto had also tried to make an attempt to reconcile with the Court of Auditors. The appointment as head of the new Pnrr governance of Carlo Alberto Manfredi Savages, president of the section of the Court since 2021, could have been read in the direction of a less conflictual dialogue. But, evidently, that wasn’t enough to calm the waters.

[ad_2]

Source link