“Next year will be one of reforms that frighten many,” emphasized Giorgia Meloni on the Atreju stage. Among the reforms there is the differentiated autonomy, a political battleground between those who support it and those who propose bringing the legislation to a referendum.
What is differentiated autonomy
“Differentiated autonomy represents the implementation of Article 116, paragraph 3, of the Constitution,” explains Ludovica Tripodi, parliamentary assistant and of Constitutional Law at Luiss. This provision allows ordinary-status regions to gain more powers than those provided for in their standard regulations. Regions can request greater autonomy in key areas such as healthcare, education, labor protection, environment, transportation, and infrastructure. However, some competences remain exclusively with the state, such as justice and workplace safety.
The autonomy allows regions to retain their own fiscal revenues without redistributing them on a national basis. Although it is provided for in the Constitution, differentiated autonomy has never been implemented. This is due to the complexity of the negotiation process between the state and the regions, as well as the fear that uneven application could widen economic and social disparities among the territories.
Supporters and opponents
The main argument in favor of differentiated autonomy, also known as “Calderoli Law” from the Minister for Regional Affairs and Autonomies, is its economic aspect. Supporters argue that greater management of regional revenues would reduce waste and simplify bureaucracy. Luca Zaia, president of Veneto, has described this model as “a path of modernity, responsibility, and efficiency.” On the opposite front, Puglia’s president, Michele Emiliano, criticizes differentiated autonomy, claiming it “makes citizens in different regions unequal.” A differentiated management of resources could indeed widen the existing economic and social gaps.
The LEP
The Essential Levels of Performance (LEP) are standards set by the Constitution that must be uniformly guaranteed across the entire national territory. Their definition is entrusted to the state and is a mandatory step before regions can request greater autonomy. However, the LEP have not yet been established.
The lack of LEP definition has generated criticism for two main reasons: it is difficult to accurately determine the economic resources needed to guarantee them, and regions can enter into differentiated autonomy agreements even without the LEP. This creates a paradox. Without the LEP, the distribution of financial resources would be based on historical spending—what a region has spent in the past. This method risks exacerbating inequalities, as past spending does not necessarily reflect future needs.
Where do we stand
The next step is the admissibility of the abrogative referendum. The decision lies with the Constitutional Court, which according to Ludovica Tripodi is expected to rule in favor. “There will therefore be a referendum which, to be valid, will require 50% plus one of the electorate to vote to repeal the law”. “Currently”, she emphasizes, “the law is incomplete, as a large part of it has already been declared illegitimate by the Constitutional Court. To repeal it definitively, a referendum will be necessary”. Differentiated autonomy remains a divisive and complex issue, reflecting the political tensions between the Regions and the State.
