Ddl Zan, Scalfarotto in Cirinnà: "A broad consensus was necessary"

Ivan Scalfarotto (Ansa)

Share

November 7, 2021 "Senator Monica Cirinnà placed 5 questions for Italia Viva on her bulletin board regarding the Zan bill. I tried to answer them, as follows." Dear Monica, the answer to all the questions is always the same.

. In the Chamber we were able to work and approve a good text, which I voted in Montecitorio and worked to make it become law of the State, which, however, in the Senate would have run aground immediately if it were not for the vote of Senator Cucca of Italia Viva, thanks to the which all the deliberations in the Justice Committee - as you know very well - always passed by 11 votes to 10. This unfortunately proved to me first that the majority in the Senate was extremely narrow and that it was necessary, to avoid going under the first cold di Cucca, broaden the consensus on the law. "

Ivan Scalfarotto of Iv writes it on Facebook.

, he adds. It was clear to everyone, in short, that the law would never be approved as it left the Chamber for the simple reason that the votes in the classroom were not sufficient to cope with a long and risky legislative process. At this point we were divided: between us who wanted a law to protect the victims of homotransphobia even at the cost of some changes and some mediation and those who, like you, wanted instead only to have a battle of principle (maybe even just and shareable ) at the cost, however, of sacrificing the law (a much less acceptable goal) ".

"The result is that you did nothing to avoid a secret vote that everyone, including you, knew was very risky to say the least and which could lead to the cancellation of all the work done up to then. Indeed, you sought that vote.

Why on earth would they have to give up an instrument of bargaining pressure without getting anything in return? But you knew very well that while going under you would have obtained the effect of being glorified by those who only wanted a battle of testimony and also by those who did not want that law (from the Vatican to the Terragni), and that today thanks to you toast the crash you have. provoked: so much the scapegoat - Italia Viva - was ready, even against the evidence of the numbers ".

"I - adds Scalfarotto - believe that the Democratic Party carries on its conscience an operation that was either of absolute incompetence (for not having been able to read the numbers in the classroom) or of supreme cynicism: that of sacrificing the victims of homotransphobia to a political operation of consensus building. In a normal world, the questions should therefore be posed to you, not us.

; you should ask yourself why you did not accept our suggestion to take a week to look for a solution, instead of hitting you with a count that you knew was at very high risk; you should be asked how long we will have to wait now to pass the law now, given that you have voluntarily wasted this incredibly favorable moment;

; you should ask yourself what you have against putting the words "homophobia and transphobia" in the law that we have always called "law against homophobia and transphobia" (a solution which is also contained in a bill signed by Alessandro Zan, as well as by the parent company Serracchiani and many other deputies of the Democratic Party).

In short, it would be time you stopped with this useless story about Italia Viva, which only had 12 senators in the courtroom when at least 19 were missing, and you explained to us why you have voluntarily and stubbornly sought the "beautiful death", as indeed you have always said it was right to do, on the skin of the victims of crimes who once again were left without a law to appeal to. You had a responsibility, you have embraced a bankruptcy strategy, have the dignity to take charge of it, stop pointing the finger at those who - abacus in hand - would not have played a decisive role in this vote in any case. "Better no law than a modified law" has been your slogan for months. As expected we were left with no law, it was a risk that you pursued deliberately.Stop complaining and if you are able, let's try again in a less ideological and more pragmatic way when in six months the Senate regulation will give us the possibility again ".