UPDATE 10 JUNE 2011:
They are emerging EVER’ ELEMENTS OF PROOF OF FRAUD.
You can watch the video summary, or read and then delve.
1- The MONOPOLY ARE PROHIBITED FROM EUROPEAN STANDARDS
2- It IS CANCELED WITHOUT REASON THE PROPERTY’ PUBLIC NETWORK (point 5 Art.23-bis) (see my answers given on this page)
3- THE PRIVATIZATIONS WILL BE MADE EQUALLY because the previous standards and European standards provide for it and do NOT concern WATER, BUT ALL PUBLIC SERVICES (read on)
Here is a summary of the reasons that should definitely NOT LEAD TO VOTE THIS REFERENDUM
———————————— TEXT 1 June WHEN I DISCOVERED THE FRAUD
There was something I did not understand about the referendum question on water. When it is so usual and’ because there is a deception. So before I reasoned with supporters of the Yes, and one thing was clear right away: IF YOU WON’ WATER REMAINS IN THE HANDS OF THE POLITICIANS WHO HAVE MANAGED IT TILL TODAY. But then, ragionandoci, I understood that there was something more, something SCARY.
I went to read the rules and I VERIFIED that the VICTORY IS would achieve more’ Grand Theft politicians to the detriment of the community’ local and IN FAVOR OF MULTINATIONAL AND LOBBY . The Referendum on the privatization of water (that does not exist- there is no privatization) is presented with falsehood to say the least TRUFFALDINE. and the result will be WATER PRIVATIZATION FOR REAL.
That's why even the center-right says nothing, EVEN AGREE QUIETLY.
Here is a first point “unassailable”
1 – the referendum in Italy and’ repeal (the “AND” expresses opposition’ the law)
2 – voting YES in the referendum 1 the entire article 23-bis is deleted
3 – subsection 5 of Article 23 bis states that the networks are owned’ PUBLIC
4 – if the YES wins, the OPPOSITION is expressed’ also to guarantee that NETWORKS ARE PUBLIC
If you wanted to hit the participation of society’ Private she needed to clear ONLY the letter a) of paragraph 2 which allows the full assignment to private individuals of the MANAGEMENT of http services://www.altalex.com/index.php?idnot = 42063 and possibly the letter B.
IN A VIDEO HERE IS SHOWN THE TRUTH’ READING THE LAWS
[youtube_sc url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZNQoaTcMqk width=450 rel=0 fs=1]
[youtube_sc url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNw3Szjbg2I width=450 rel=0 fs=1]
Question 1 of the Referendum is presented for a referendum to save the ownership of water,
INSTEAD AND HITS THE PROPERTY’ OF MUNICIPALITIES IN FAVOR OF THE SALE
It is a REFERENDUM ON ALL PUBLIC SERVICES, not just water (They are excluded only natural gas serivizi, electric energy and regional rail transport).
The rules of the European Union and the Constitution require that YOU MUST ENSURE TO ALL THE ESSENTIAL SERVICES but making sure that THERE ARE NO POLITICAL caravans . Article 23 â € "bis that you want to repeal CLEARLY STATES this principle.
The law raises the stakes and states that, PUR ENSURING ALL ESSENTIAL SERVICES, you have to find ways that the town can be SAVE CITIZENS with the use of the market where possible. The law today does not exclude that services can also be entrusted to social cooperatives as well as to companies . If yes wins the first all BECOME’ STATE, but later, imposition for European competition in services, everything will have to be put back on the market, that is, it will be sold off to multinationals .
That is the current law (to be canceled) impinges is just WAY THAT HAVE the caravans POLITICIANS TO MANAGE THINGS STILL UNDER THE MONOPOLY, BUT ONLY UNTIL THE SALE REQUIRED BY EU
Fortunately this is prohibited by EU STANDARDS, that's why after having nationalized ALL, the government will be forced to sell to the highest bidder, AND ONLY THE MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES WILL BE ABLE TO BUY , at bargain prices.
The promoters have convinced everyone that it is a referendum on the PROPERTY’ OF WATER, but it is false. This is the only distribution, rather, you want to delete a part of the law that CLEARLY SAYS THAT ARE PUBLIC WATER NETWORKS.
If you win the Yes ...… THE MULTINATIONAL WILL ALSO BUY THE NETWORK AND MAKE THE PRICE YOU WANT WHILE TODAY’ FORBIDDEN
Moreover, the law already establishes that THE RENUMERATION OF COMPANIES’ PRIVATE E’ LIMITED TO THE RECOVERY OF THE INVESTMENT.
That is, today there is the principle that NO INVESTMENTS – NO PROFITS and recovered investments is ridiscute contract.
When Multinationals will buy the network, They WILL DO WHAT YOU WANT.
MUST READ MOUNTAINS READ, TREATED, RULES, REGULATIONS TO UNDERSTAND THE SCOPE OF THE REFERENDUM
Suffice it to say that the article of the law that it is proposed to cancel is about 4 pages.
The constitutional ruling that is mentioned in the question is 110 PAGES , and concerns intricate conflicts between the government and some regions on the issue of public services, including waste management. The most active regions in the constitutional controversy were the CAMPANIA, LIGURIA, TUSCANY, EMILIA THE PIEDMONT, UMBRIA AND APULIA. The Campania was seen even delete a piece of their own laws. But essentially the Court removed the government's interference in the regions, while not allowing the regions to monopolize the regional market.
To understand the scope of the question, let's take a REAL look at THE LAW trying to say the essential.
Article 23-bis THAT YOU WANT TO CANCEL IN ITSELF SAYS (READ)
Article 23-bis THAT YOU WANT TO CANCEL IN ITSELF SAYS
1. The provisions of this article govern the assignment and management of local public services of economic importance, in implementation of EU legislation and in order to promote more’ wide dissemination of the principles of competition, of freedom’ of establishment and freedom to provide services to all economic operators interested in the management of services of general interest in the local area, nonche’ of guarantee the right of all users to the universality’ and accessibility’ local public services and an essential level of performance, according to the article 117, second paragraph, letters and) e m), the Constitution, ensuring an adequate level of user protection, according to the principles of subsidiarity, proportionality’ and sincere cooperation. Nothing contained in this Article shall apply to all local public services and prevail over the relevant rules of the sector either incompatible.
They reread the parts in bold, provide the essential service: NO ONE WILL’ NEVER PRIVATE WATER AS IT IS TODAY IN CERTAIN AREAS
By reading the following point 1 (comma 1 Art.23 up) it is understood that the repeal will affect ALL LOCAL PUBLIC SERVICES except for the distribution of natural gas, electricity and regional rail transport.
The point 2 establishes the rules for the assignment of local services which are different depending on whether the service company is private or of mixed public and private ownership (ie the municipalities with local operators).
It also predicted that if "due to peculiar economic, social, environmental and geomorphology of the territorial context of reference, do not allow an effective and useful recourse to the market, custody can’ be in favor of company’ wholly public capital, participated by the local authority, that has the requisites required by EU lawâ € œ that is a majority company owned by the municipalities, provided that this is justified by the situation , so OTHERWISE BE GUARANTEED THE SERVICE. Until the Constitutional Court ruling, the government could establish the criteria for managing these â € œexceptionalâ € situations? according to their own stability plans (comma 10 lett.a) but this is’ STATE DELETED since according to the Constitution the task MATTER regions. This means that if the â € œYesâ € ?? everything will be in the hands of the state to the detriment of the regions and especially the municipalities that today are the owners of the institutions. This will mean that the regions that have thirsty their citizens will no longer respond as they do today.
ATTENTION : IS CANCELED point 5 of Article 23 bis which states
â€œ5. Without prejudice to the property’ Public networks, their management can’ It is entrusted to private parties. "
which means that IF I WIN "Yes" EVEN THE WATER SUPPLY TO BE SOLD BY THE STATE AS ALREADY MULTINATIONAL’ SOLD LOT OF PART OF ELECTRIC NETWORKS TELECOMMUNICATIONS AND LEAVING THE STATE ONLY COSTS !!!
Around Italy there are POLITICIAN CARRIAGES that survive parked inside some public service bodies which, on the other hand, ARE INTENDED TO DISAPPEAR TODAY . In fact, the point 8 of Article 23 BIS condemns them to disappear from 1 January 2012 , and since then the service companies will have to hire staff according to the QUALITY rules’ AND EFFICIENCY, not for the recommendation and policy details.
IT IS A GREAT RIPULISTI CASTE OF THE REFERENDUM SPORTS DISCUSSION
Remember the recent episode of Report on recruitment to the transport company of the municipality of Rome?
With the current law, those mechanisms are destined to disappear because since 1 January and the calls for tenders regulated by European laws for a transparent company will prevent hiring “policies”.
IF THE `` YES '' WIN? THESE CARRIAGES WILL BE SAVED UNDER EUROPEAN LAWS – PARASITISM AGAIN - BUT THEN BE FORCED TO SELL TUBES ( THAT IS NOT TODAY’ POSSIBLE) A PLACE TO PUT THE NETWORK (THE STATE HAS NOT MONEY). WILL THE MULTINATIONAL COMPANIES WHICH WILL BE SOLD THE COMPANY’ AND PROBABLY TUBES, BUT WILL BUY ALL WITH POLITICIANS IN: IF I WIN have settled LIFETIME !
But what will happen IF THE REFERENDUM WINS, ie once THAT ALL PUBLIC SERVICES BECOME STATE?
Surely the European Union will be forced to open an infringement proceeding against Italy.
Maybe Italy will pay’ one MEGA FINE, but then in the end Italy will be forced to obey EUROPEAN RULES or to EXIT EUROPE. That the state will’ forced to sell all you will have’ taken by municipalities (good companies and bad ).
But you know that these auctions , being of all public services, OF COURSE WILL BE MADE IN STYLE ENEL, ALITALIA etc., that is to say that will buy all the MULTINATIONAL
While today the well-administered COMMON owners are GOOD COMPANY’ that corporations can not buy WHY’ EFFICIENT AND TOO EXPENSIVE (some are worth billions), when the Government sells the ENTIRE NATIONALIZED NETWORK IN ONE SHOT, they will buy
ONLY THE MULTINATIONAL !!!
if yes, it will be advantageous for the multinationals
You do not have doubts that the government WILL’ FORCED TO SELL ALL, otherwise we should EXIT EUROPE. Also because investments are required for hundreds of billions , that the Italian State has not.
This means that the referendum serves expropriating MUNICIPALITIES VIRTUOSI, and this will allow’ GOVERNMENT TO HAVE A CASE OF COMMON THESE DAMAGES, but it will allow multinationals to ENTER MARKETS THAT ARE EXCLUDED TODAY DUE TO THE PRESENCE OF GOOD COMPANIES’ PROPERTY’ MUNICIPAL, ie CITIZENS.
Quite the contrary OF WHAT THEY SAY THE COMMITTEES FOR YOU’
The confirmation of the real purpose of the Referendum on’ water , nationalize ALL, ie give in the hands of politicians , it is also written in the initiator of the referendum Committee website , the Committee for the "Yes" , who writes ( http://www.referendumacqua.it/chi-siamo.html )
"We are citizens, free women and men who have been fighting for public water management for years, participatory and democratic. "
So they want public water management, which has nothing to do with PROPERTIES’ OF WATER. BUT TODAY THE PIPES ARE PUBLIC , AND IT'S’ THE REFERENDUM THAT MAKES THEM BE SOLD THE DELETING point 5 dell’art.23-bis
Then he writes â € œâ €? We defended the water from speculators, from the market and interest. "
So the goal is to defend water from the market, but not from the interests of the politicians who until now have managed it by stealing and squandering it, reducing it to a sieve.
â € œWe fight against the logic of the marketâ € ?? therefore the goal is not water, but the market,
â € œWe want to decide on the water.â € ??
We who? Municipalities, committees, or STATE AS SARA’ IF I WIN YOU’
â € œWe can do this also thanks to the three referendums for the republishing of water services.â € ??
Here: this is the objective declared CLEAR and self-evident: MAKE STATE ("Republish") water services.
This means PUT THEM IN THE HANDS OF POLITICIANS IN ROME , THE SAME THAT THEY MANAGED TO 50 years, the same ones who held the south dry, who then made arrangements with the camorra, maybe the same politicians who run the Naples rubbish ?
Are we joking ? I spit in the face to those who have reduced the Italian water supply to a sieve, that have forced entire countries to ration water for decades.
Then there are other realities as well , how companies in PRIVATE PROPERTY’ MUNICIPAL efficient that there are in the Venezie. Here at least the prices are decent, the water is good. sure, There are in these virtuous bodies also some politicians who eat there, but with the current rules in the future, if they go wrong, they WILL BE FORCED TO COMPETITIVENESS, and will not cost taxpayers nothing .
BUT IF YOU WON, also the PRIVATE companies owned by the municipalities that are in northern Italy WILL BE RETURNED TO THE POLITICIANS OF ROME, ALL STATE, that state which reduced Napoli to a landfill.
THEY SAY : â € œWe are many and with the help of all we can take back the water.â € ??
But why , they STOLEN the water ? Someone wants to steal the water ? Or the truth is that Europe forces us to CUT POLITICAL WAGONS and they are opposed?
Yet : MAYBE THAT AFTER MAKING THIS STATE ENTERPRISES NORTH STATE THE SELL’ TO MAKE CASH FOR MULTINATIONAL ? MAYBE THE OBJECTIVE E’ JUST WHAT THE PEOPLE Bluff ?
Let's see the questions to figure it out and go on the site http://www.acquabenecomune.org
Meanwhile, we begin by noting that the drafters of the questions are ALL SOUTH except 1
Gaetano Azzariti (full professor of constitutional law University of Rome La Sapienza)
Gianni Ferrara (emeritus of constitutional law University of Rome La Sapienza)
Alberto Lucarelli (full professor of public law University of Naples Federico II)
Ugo Mattei (full professor of civil law University of Turin)
Luca Nivarra (full professor of civil law University of Palermo)
Stefano RodotÃ (emeritus of civil law University of Rome La Sapienza)
The site suggests that you want to â € œsellâ € ?? the water, But what does this mean ?
You MUST PAY THE BILLS ?
It is not by chance that the NATIONALIZATION of distribution will allow those who do not pay the bill to CONTINUE NOT TO PAY IT ?
Let's move on to the technical analysis of the first question
Method of assignment and management of local public services of economic importance. Repeal
Â "Do you want art. 23 to (Local public services of economic importance) Decree Law 25 June 2008 n.112 “Urgent provisions for economic development, simplification, the competitiveness , the stabilization of public finance and tax equalization” convert, with amendments, into law 6 August 2008, n.133, as amended by Article 30, comma 26 the law 23 luglio 2009, 99 laying “Provisions for the development and internationalization of businesses, as well as on energy” and by article 15 of the law decree 25 September 2009, n.135, laying down “Urgent provisions for the implementation of Community obligations and for the execution of judgments of the Court of Justice of the European Community” convert, with amendments, into law 20 November 2009, n.166, in the version following the judgment of 325 2010 the Constitutional Court?Â»
Meanwhile, let's go get the law here http://www.altalex.com/index.php?idnot=42063 and we read that the objective of the law is (art.1 lett.a)
"A goal of net government debt that is equal to 2,5 percent of GDP in 2008 ,, Consequently, al 2 percent in 2009, 1 percent in 2010 and at 0,1 percent in 2011 nonche’ to maintain the ratio of government debt to GDP by no values â€‹â€‹above 103,9 percent in 2008, al 102,7 percent in 2009, al 100,4 percent in 2010 ed al 97,2 percent in 2011;"That is, they wanted to give a straightened accounts, while letter b says that the law wants to restart the economy also through â € œ interventions aimed at ensuring competitive conditions’ for the simplification and acceleration of administrative and jurisdictional procedures affecting the purchasing power of families and the cost of livingâ € ?? , ie you want to increase the competition that otherwise the welfare sideshows lead us to peak.
This is the goal of the law, MUST SEE IF YOU GET AND HOW .
The law is to foster Broadband (Internet short, art.2), le Start Up (new businesses in short, art.3 ) then investment systems for advanced innovation(Art.4.1) especially for South (art 4.1 added bis), then fight against inflation (art.5 ), BANK OF SOUTHERN (Art.6 TER) and so on we talk about energy, VAT on hydrocarbons, Case , TAV, EXPO, Instruction, riceca etc.
In the video, the analysis of article 23 that you want to delete: it establishes public ownership of the networks, It provides the service to all, obliges the transparency and the efficiency of the parasitic classes of political parked, and yet it puts a lot of brakes on the arrival of multinationals precisely in public services.
CERTAIN THAT THERE ARE MANY QUESTIONS ON THE REAL PURPOSE OF THIS REFERENDUM
The question asks you to delete an entire article (il 23-up) of 4 ( QUATTRO! ) pages of a law that aligns with Europe and that affects ALMOST ALL PUBLIC SERVICES (water, trash, local transport etc.)
As opposed to what they do believe the promoters in this article and YOU WANT TO DELETE’ established:
– that the ownership of the E’ PUBLIC
– that the service is guaranteed to all
– that it must ensure transparency in assignments (and not the Camorra)
– that the company’ multinationals have great limits in entering
– that the gains of the company’ must BE RESTRICTED INVESTMENT FOR RECOVERY
Basically IF YOU WIN THE REFERENDUM
– They are preserved and BARONIE THE CASTE THE POLICIES parked in institutions
– They say no to property’ the public network
– we create the conditions for SELL ALL TO MULTINATIONAL
In my opinion the Referendum NOT’ TO VOTE, why vote NO to facilitate achievement of the quorum.
Articles on NO