Minister Giancarlo Giorgetti, Minister of the Economy. Where is he? He's coming. Hello, Minister. The CEO of Poste Italiane, Matteo Delfante. Please. We wanted to make you a bit more dynamic, and naturally Giovanni Sallusti.
Good morning everyone. Good morning, Minister. Good evening. Not good morning. Good evening. You're right, I'm jet-lagged and I apologize for that. So, obviously, the importance of this panel speaks for itself, so I'll skip any introductory notes which would be superfluous.
The new economic challenges of Italy that produces, and that is a theme, perhaps the theme par excellence, that concerns the League and the center-right government, right? I mean, I don't want to do historiography, but the League was probably born also as a party of producers, in my view. Certainly, the center-right and the League in particular represent that silent majority that produces, which is sometimes put in a corner in the bubble and not in the reality where revenue is generated, where salaries are paid, but in the bubble it's put in a corner by the noisy minority of salons, intellectuals, those who do things, meet people but don't work, let's say. But the silent majority remains, which for the center-right and the League has often been the electoral majority.
So, from this point of view, I would like to ask Minister Giorgetti, given that the spirit of this two-day event is a prospective budget, right? That is, what has been done primarily for that silent majority that is the backbone, as the smart people say, of the center-right and the League, and then a look into the future, perhaps with a more specific question in the second round on the budget.
It seems to me that you used an image that struck me a lot at the Cernobbio Forum when you brought up pragmatic sovereignty, right? Which also seems to me like language linked to this silent majority that produces and to how the government and the League have tried to best represent its reasons. So, in short, what has been done? What is pragmatic sovereignty in your view, and what is the perspective? In short,
So, first of all, good evening everyone, and this is an opportunity to clarify, because afterwards I don't read reports, I don't read the newspapers, but I realize that it needs to be clarified what pragmatic sovereignty means, in the sense that I define myself as a sovereignist. I think I was elected and I am in government to defend the interests of Italians. Now, how do I defend the interests of Italians? The first thing, let's say, that I always say is that you have to, when you have a mountain of public debt like the one accumulated, you must be able to free yourself from the market's blackmail, which can send you flying, as has happened in Italian political and economic history, even recently. That's what we've done in these 4 years without implementing an austerity policy, because alongside securing the debt, lowering the spread, the fact that our bonds are bought by the whole world unlike what happens for others, we also managed to implement decisive measures that I believe were also mentioned this morning, namely the tax reduction for low and middle incomes, the introduction of the flat tax for 85,000, so we managed to implement a policy that, as I said, but being the son of a fisherman, some may have misunderstood, of floating in the sense that the boat has been brought into safe waters and this is a very important thing because not all my colleagues at this moment feel so calm around the world seeing the turbulence on interest rates and so on, but at the same time, by making those interventions, naturally, we would have liked to do much more, we will do much more, and they have in some way made us consistent with our approach, with our way of seeing things.
What I think must always be clear to those who do politics, but especially to those who, like me, unfortunately, are the Minister of the Economy and Finance, is a principle of realism, and therefore we must try to do everything possible within the principle of reality, because otherwise, I reiterate, risks are always possible. This is certainly true.
Very clear. To Dr. Delfante, I wanted to ask, since Poste obviously is a given, let's reiterate it, right? It is one of the strategic pillars of the country's development, right? And this word 'development' I believe are words that this audience, this political and cultural community, likes, right, compared to the culture of 'no', too much in vogue in other places, let's say. But from this point of view, therefore, I believe it is first of all interesting to understand what is the development path that Poste has in mind for itself and therefore in cascade for the country system, and then also with you perhaps in the second round on a question more of current affairs, not irrelevant, but I would stay on the scenario for this first round.
Well, the path. Thank you first of all for the invitation and I must say, in this setting, also thank you for the trust that the Minister and this government gives to the undersigned and to the entire management of Poste in continuing an important challenge.
What I could easily promise or tell would be the financial performance, the dividend, the stock has done well, but I believe that although a theme certainly dear from the point of view of the dividend we distribute to our Minister, I believe it is more important to be able to tell the Italian system that we have put Poste back at the center of the country's logistics chain. So, 9 years have passed since we started this path. We were practically not in the field, sixth, with a market share of 13%, today we are back to being first and much more solid than the competitors who are all foreign, French, English, German, and we have addressed that anomaly whereby every postal service in its own country is the primary home delivery parcel operator. We were sixth at home, the first five were making money and the sixth was losing it. It seemed, right, a paradox. We fixed this thing and in the next 3 years we think from this position of strength to take other important steps to consolidate ourselves.
The other important challenge, because we believe that when you are a system company you must make the stock perform well and that is a necessary condition to sit in this chair but not sufficient, your task is to give a contribution to the sectors where the company works or where the company can work from a system perspective, and so we have been on our shoulders for about a year and a half the challenge of accompanying the country through an important operation on Telecom Italia, through a technological, digital evolution and transformation that is happening all over the world, which will affect businesses, which will affect the public administration, which affects all citizens and which cannot fail to affect our country. We cannot miss that train and therefore we will do our best to get on it.
Yes, well, because excuse me. No, no, go ahead, go ahead.
What Delfante just said, in my opinion, is very important because in these 4 years I believe the government has secured, not only by saving, but also by giving a perspective to situations that had been festering for a long time. Some are, let's say, of greater prominence, others are, like the case of TIM which has taken another breath, which now with the operation that has been launched, in my judgment, imagines and has a vision and gives a vision in a technologically fundamental sector for the development of the economy. So, to those who say we haven't done economic policy, I believe we have done it intelligently and with vision.
Clear.
Minister, I would start from your words when you say within a principle of reality, which the people of producers knows better than anyone, otherwise they wouldn't be the people of producers, we could do even more, we will do even more. So, from this point of view, given that the spirit of this two-day event is also obviously aimed at the financial maneuver now imminent, at least in its initial construction, I wanted to ask you, I wanted to ask a slightly more political question, that is, on some salient fronts for the center-right and the League in particular. What is, in your opinion, that extra bit? What can be done? I am referring first of all to the fiscal front, which, as they say, is one of perhaps two or three reasons why the center-right exists in Italy, the fiscal issue which is, as they say, almost demanded by your people. Here I say this as a political journalist, given that operations have been carried out, some fiscal, but a sort of fiscal revolution is still invoked by a large part of your people. The second front is the pension one, given that also in recent days the League's proposal on the possibility of retiring at 64 with recalculation. Here I act as a journalist, I just note that this proposal does not please the CGIL, for me it is already a good reason to listen to this proposal, let's say, but I wanted to know from you how you see it, especially on these two fronts.
So, let's start with the fiscal front which obviously, as has been remembered, is part of the DNA of the center-right and here there are several proposals that I have obviously already heard. There is the issue of raising the income level to which to expand the cut in social security contributions. There is the opportunity, which however passes, I believe Siri spoke about it this morning, of raising the limit regarding the flat tax which passes through a rather abstruse and, in my opinion, justified limit of Europe with which we must negotiate. And there is a theme on which I believe a reflection must be made. There is also a bill presented by the League group, in particular by the young people, which is that of wages for young people. I said it in Cernobbio and I want to say it here too. The problem of the fact that when entering the world of work, wages are too low is absolutely evident. I think we must make a proposal of a fiscal type, a tax advantage, which must be matched, however, with a willingness on the part of employers and entrepreneurs to recognize more adequate wages. In the last budget law, with great success, we implemented a sort of policy of this type. All those who renewed their employment contracts, we recognized a tax reduction, a 5% flat tax. In my opinion, it is something similar with an agreement between entrepreneurs, employers who make an investment in young people and therefore increase their wages. On these wage increases, the State could apply a reduced tax, a sort of flat tax. This could be, in my opinion, also with respect to the depopulation, if you will, of talents and capabilities that tend to go abroad, something interesting. Naturally, it is an idea among many and therefore naturally there will be a sort of funnel where all parties will clash and fight and we will see. As for the pension issue, provided that the system obviously must ensure long-term sustainability, this proposal of the League for 64 years, in my opinion, must be evaluated correctly because if one looks at the Fornero reform, one finds, I won't say an injustice, but there is a distortion. There is a distortion between those who started working before '96 and those who started working after '96 who are treated differently, that is, those who started working before '96 are substantially treated worse than those who started working after '96. I didn't understand this, that is, I don't understand it.
So, regardless of the fact that they say 'Ah, well, you want to increase, decrease the retirement age?', in my opinion, we need to understand what we are talking about and see the system correctly. If I give the possibility to those who started working after 1996 to calculate their pension with the contributory system and retire at 64, why can't those who started working before '96 do it? In my opinion, there is also constitutionally some defect. I understand that the years of the demographic boom constitute a wave that, when it accesses the pension, risks creating problems, but the system must be linear and in some way guarantee overall equity. So, in my opinion, it is a matter of working on this and obviously trying to find solutions that guarantee the sustainability of the pension system, but also a sort of equity of treatment among all workers. This, in my opinion, is right and must be pursued.
Dr. Delfante, in part you anticipated and burned the second question, but I'm going back to the assault because only in part, instead in my opinion it deserves to be explored on its own, that is, the implications for Poste, for the country system, and then for the concrete life of citizens of the operation on TIM, that is, to explain it perhaps to a non-expert technically what would change between before and after developing this operation.
Well, today we have a TIM company that in the last 3 years has done an excellent job of securing its own balance sheet, but for historical reasons unfortunately comes from 20 years of serious financial difficulties due to an excess of debt, and so when a company has too much debt, it must pay most of the revenue and margins, the profits it makes for interest on the debt and therefore cannot invest. And not being able to invest in a sector like the technological one is clearly penalizing for the country system. So, if on one hand we can recognize that Poste is the historic company of the citizen, therefore the retail company, in the same way we can say that TIM is the historic company of the corporate world and of the public administration, because it is the company that brought the first telephone lines, which then became fax, which then became cloud and hopefully gradually also artificial intelligence in all Italian companies, therefore within our production system, and therefore we cannot afford, as the Italian system, not to have sufficiently broad shoulders to make the necessary investments to bring that technology into the Italian system. So we will save and revalue and carry forward the current strategy of TIM, but giving it an important balance sheet. The company will have 5 billion in operating margin, will capitalize almost 50 billion, we will be 150,000 employees, so it will truly be a colossus not only national but at a European level, so that we can not only say again that in Italy we have an operator that accompanies the country in the digital transition and in the artificial intelligence transition, but that if there are opportunities outside Italy and therefore if there is a European consolidation process, we can sit at the table and evaluate if there is an opportunity for us as well.
