We have tried to follow the Milanese approach in several other municipalities: liberal program, moderate leadership, cohesion of the center right. In some cases it worked and our role was important, but the overall balance, we all know, is not positive.
What do I propose to you at this point for the future of IU?
We are sure that the IU proposals for Italy developed in recent years, contained in the book “Io Siamo” and presented in the administrative elections, are what the country needs and our program for Italy is a precious heritage that we will all protect and carry forward.
Just as we are sure that it is necessary to build a moderately-led liberal-popular pole with a program of very strong reforms. Woe to think instead that the center right useful for Italy should be designed as a right-wing extremist or even lepenist traction: it would self-delegate the same center-right to a noisy but marginal role and would reduce the national political confrontation to a derby between the Party of the Nation and Cinquestelle.
As IU we have certainly demonstrated an organizational capacity superior to that of many parties present in Parliament: we have exceeded 6000 members and we have created over 150 Porte in almost all the Italian provinces. Not a few of our ports have been able to play a role of presence and relevant proposal in their territories and the more than 200 committees for the No-Che-Serve that have already been set up are proof of this.
We have given a voice to that part of the Italians who want a real and profound change in our country, not the only apparent one of the Party of the Nation, not the destructive one of the Cinquestelle. But we failed to make IU a strong enough movement. The electoral and rooted results we have achieved are not such as to justify the effort we are making. The operating model that we have set ourselves is not further sustainable: the external sources of financing have proved to be of a very limited level and I have personally invested everything I could put into it.
We must certainly look for other causes, equally important, within ourselves. Not in all parts of Italy we have been able to attract and select sufficiently capable and available people and many of our territorial garrisons have not shown enough vitality. Certainly there have also been errors in the central organization of our activities and I take responsibility for all of them first and foremost.
So, now, in front of us we basically have two possible alternatives:
– To merge IU into an existing party or into another movement.
– To leave the scene as a political movement, entrusting our “unique” fans with the freedom – but also the responsibility – to carry on the battles and ideas where there is fertile ground.
The first alternative – to merge – I see it as a “technical” forcing with respect to an effectively “unique” political identity. There are certainly people and movements that we feel close to and towards which we have shown sympathy, but converging will be a choice of each and not an operation at the table.
I personally want to continue to be useful to my country as I know I have been as a manager, as an entrepreneur, as a servant of the state and also as President of Italia Unica. With independence of judgment and freedom of thought. I’m still not sure what I’ll do, but the proposal I presented to relaunch Monte dei Paschi di Siena goes in this direction.
In recent years I have held the role of President of Italia Unica full time – there can be no part time in a role like this – but today I feel I cannot give my best in this position.
Therefore they presented me resigning from all positions together with the members of the Executive Committee at an Assembly to be convened in a short time to resolve the formal dissolution of IU. I do it and we do it with great gratitude towards the many who have committed themselves with competence and generosity and with the same regret for not having brought them to the desired results.
I propose to conclude here the experience of IU as a political movement by putting our energy as good people at the service of the Committees for No-What-Serve and to realize our vision of Italy and our solutions at national and local level. to relaunch it. We will continue to hold each other close.
We have not been able to convince enough Italians that our Italy is sliding towards poverty and that a very strong change is needed to restore trust and hope to the country. We wanted to give a concrete example of serious, competent and generous politics. We have not been able to “pass” this type of change made of ambition and courage, but we can be proud of how we have behaved, of the example we have set and the passion we have put into it. IU was useful in enriching the discussion in the country and the hard work we have done together – we can be sure – will still be needed in the future.
Read the full report here (pdf)

Previous article5 easy plants for those without a green thumb
Next articleEndometriosis: symptoms, causes, treatment, diagnosis