The Italian’s postal market liberalization: the case of Poste Italiane. No independent authority.

As is now known at the end of 2010, the Council of Ministers approved the legislative decree transposing into our legislation the European Directive 6 / 200 8, which requires the beginning of this year, the full liberalization of the postal market.

Right now some commentators, then obviously supported by a report conducted by the Antitrust Authority of Parliament, had placed some doubt on the real scope of the liberalization and, especially on the role and functions of the subject controller, as impartial and independent,  the European standard requires us.

The  doubt, rather than decreasing, increased.

In particular, the Istituto Bruno Leoni, an independent  “think thank” institute ihttp://www.brunoleoni.it/nextpage.aspx?codice=10078 noted in a briefing paper published a few days ago that the rule of transposition contains five problems of no small moment: 1. the continued monopoly of judicial and recommended for notification, 2. the designation of the Italian Post Office as the universal service provider for 15 years, 3. The size, the method of calculation of its cost and financing of universal service, 4. the allocation of postal regulatory functions rather than an independent government agency, 5. the requirement for operators of postal services to meet the working conditions provided by collective bargaining work of reference.

Now, especially being assigned to a government agency with staff from the Ministry of Economic Development (Communications) rather than an independent Authority appears to be a solution rather illogical, as already mentioned above.

According to some newspapers, however, the doubts would come also to the technicians of the Presidency of the Republic that would be carefully studying the proposal from the Government and the Authority’s findings http://www.blitzquotidiano.it/cronaca-italia/liberalizzare-poste-decreto-ue- quirinale-752998 /

The response of the competent parliamentary committees for the moment seems favorable to the executive with the only limit (a bit ‘unstable though) the binding nomination of the board of directors of the Agency by the competent committees of the House and Senate. http://archivio-radiocor.ilsole24ore.com/articolo-901583/poste-parere-camera-nomine/

According to the Minister of Communications, however this would be a choice “” The EU directive requires a process of liberalization with an authority or an independent agency. I think it’s premature a new authority that could preside over the rules in this area. The Post Office is a great wealth of the country, liberalization is in place in many countries, but also the universal service is an asset. So the specificity of Italy obliges us to take decisions. “

http://notizie.virgilio.it/notizie/economia/2011/2_febbraio/08/poste_romani_agenzia_sufficiente_a_chiusura_infrazione_ue, 28240262.html

Frankly I still do not understand the reasons of liberalization adopted in this form, even by adopting the formula “liberalization without privatization”, which should explain the reasons for this imperfect liberalization and privilege attributes in this way the operator “incumbent” and that, given by a Minister who should be a workhorse of the liberal, I feel really “out of tune.”

 

Fulvio Sarzana

www.fulviosarzana.it
Studio Legale Roma Sarzana & Associati
Share Button

Articolo disponibile anche in lingua: Italian