port authorities have changed their name, now they are System Authorities. But in my view, between Genoa and Savona this system does not exist and has never existed ». Luca Becce, Assiterminal, followed Prime Minister Mario Draghi’s visit to Genoa on Wednesday, president of taking notes. «Paolo Emilio Signorini’s report was interesting, well done, very detailed. But from the exhibition it is clear that Genoa and Savona have remained two distinct bell towers, unlike the efforts made for example in Venice and Chioggia or between La Spezia and Marina di Carrara to make them truly systematic ports ».
But it is also true that Genoa and Savona have always had histories well undone. They almost never converge.
«Yes, but it is also time to stop saying that things are not done because they are difficult to do. The truth is that today there is no system between the two ports. The latest case? The relocation of chemical deposits: in Genoa it has been said that if you really can’t find any, they can always be placed in Savona or Vado Ligure … and on the basis of what principle? But there is still an even more emblematic case ».
«That of the Position Paper: the two ports are so little systematized that the Confindustria of Genoa begins to prepare a strategic document of direction, which serves to establish its own positions for the future development of the docks. But it does so by completely omitting Savona. Without even presupposing a dialogue, a coordination with the territorial association of the other city. Completely ignoring the system of the two airports, and the coordination that should ensue. But the issue goes beyond the situation of individual ports: there is a question of regulatory changes that should be implemented. And the Ministry of Infrastructure and Sustainable Mobility is doing well to work on a new national transport plan ”.
For many, ministries have already made too many of these documents.
«No, I agree on the need to centralize strategic infrastructural choices. It was the initial spirit of the port reform. The problem lies in the fact that this has clashed with Title V of the Constitution, which has largely prevented its implementation. In fact, at present the world of docks would need at least two major interventions: one the exclusion of the ports from title V, and two the real functioning of coordination tables, which should truly be a moment of discussion and decision. And therefore the regulation on concessions, especially now that we have seen how in the Competition bill the provision that this must be drawn up by Mims has failed ”.
To Draghi the president of the ports of Genoa and Savona instead underlined the urgency of a change in the legal nature of the ports, from public to private.
“Well, I honestly ask myself why he did it in that context, and what sense does it make to insist on such an argument now, when we are close to the ruling of the European Court of Justice regarding the imposition of VAT on state property fees. It seems clear to me that the more it is said that ports must not be public, the more one exposes oneself to the thesis of those who claim that the payment of VAT is. Furthermore, when Signorini cites Rotterdam or Antwerp as an example, who does he think are the main shareholders of those companies, if not the local municipalities? Do we therefore want an accentuation of localism? I repeat, in my opinion there are other interventions, certainly not the ambiguities linked to the legal nature of the Adsp “.
At the hearing in the Senate you returned to the issue of multiple concessions with the same intended use in port.
“If paragraph 7 of art. 18 of the law on ports thus, there is the risk that pure terminal operators, which are prevented from growing, succumb to the expansion of global carriers. Among other things, today, according to Community legislation, if the terminals are classified as ancillary activities in the consolidated financial statements, they could even take advantage of the subsidized regime of the tonnage tax “.
You are a PSA man: the tug-of-war with the MSC shipping and terminal group in Genoa is well known.
«No look, apart from the fact that in Genoa, on the basis of the pronouncement of the Avvocatura di Stato, the principle of multiple concession has passed, this is not a question of PSA and MSC. This is a bigger issue, which affects the entire supply chain. It is necessary to understand if, at the Italian level, there is no substantial interest in delivering the supply chain under the control of subjects, the shipowners, who already have to derogate from the Antitrust regulations “. –