Italy’s North-South Divide Now Faces a Historic Autonomy Move
Italy has long carried a stubborn economic split between its north and south. In Trentino-Alto Adige, a wealthier northern region, the annual GDP per person hovers around 40,000 euros. In Calabria, a southern area marked by slower industry growth, brain drain, and higher poverty, the figure sits near 16,000 euros. Since the postwar era, this gap has persisted and even widened at times, fueling noticeable migration from south to north and building a sense of national distance. With the current government led by Giorgia Meloni, critics warn the gap could widen as the state moves to grant regions greater control over taxes that were previously managed by central authorities. The final signature from President Sergio Mattarella remains the last formal step before the reform becomes law.
If the bill becomes law, the regional differentiated autonomy framework would appear in the Official Gazette and take effect, according to those familiar with the matter. The measure passed the lower chamber with 172 votes in favor, 99 against, and one abstention. It drew loud applause from the League party, led by Matteo Salvini, a long-time advocate of the proposal. Critics point out that even during past administrations, including the era of Silvio Berlusconi, secessionist impulses in the north had not reached this level of formal momentum. Some observers describe the moment as historic for regionalists and federalists, while opponents see it as a risky step toward unequal governance that could widen regional disparities.
A legal expert from a political party called it a historic day, noting a mix of awe and emotion. A veteran figure from the League spoke as Padania banners appeared in the chamber, signaling a symbol of a northern nation. Opponents shouted in protest, arguing that the plan would entrench regional autonomy at the expense of national cohesion. The bill had already cleared the Senate in January, laying the groundwork for broader debates about its implications.
Mattarella as the Final Hurdle
The options to derail the proposal are now extremely limited. President Mattarella has a 30-day window to decide whether to promulgate the measure. If the president chooses not to sign it, the decision can rest on constitutional grounds, and the text would return to Parliament. If both chambers approve it again, the president would be obliged to give assent, followed by publication in the Official Gazette and enactment.
The reform, which Meloni pledged to the League at the start of her term, aims to reshape how Italy allocates and manages responsibilities. In practical terms, regions would be able to take on competences in multiple areas, including education, environmental protection, cultural heritage, health, sports, agriculture, energy, scientific research, and the management of ports and civil airports, along with broad economic duties. Critics from Svimez, the southern development institute, warn that the plan could shift power away from the central state toward regional authorities. Adriano Giannola, the institute’s president, described the proposal as a dangerous shift during a parliamentary hearing.
Local business groups have raised concerns about possible reductions in southern services. Confindustria, the main employers’ association, warned that the reform might threaten essential services for southern communities. Critics across party lines argue that the plan lacks a credible mechanism to close the regional gap and may crystallize historical spending patterns rather than promote long term solutions. Some opponents warn that the north could end up with a more favorable fiscal position, while the south would struggle to keep pace.
Leaders from major opposition parties have expressed strong reservations. A center-left figure described the reform as an attempt to hollow out national unity. Others warn that the plan could deepen regional divides and undermine shared public services. Supporters contend that giving regions more control could improve efficiency and tailor policies to local needs, arguing that centralized systems often fail to reflect diverse regional conditions. The political clash remains sharp, with ongoing debates in parliaments and public squares, as both sides press their case with appeals to fairness, efficiency, and national identity.