Illegality, Enlightenment and Ambiguity: A Hot Italian Recipe

Abstract

Studying Italian immigration policy gives the author a chance to reconsider public policy making patterns, particularly ones concerning social issues. Innovative measures addressed to low social strata – at least in Italy – often originate in benevolent illegal practices introduced by sympathetic civil servants and social workers, pressed and supported by voluntary sector associations, charities and unions. Practices promoted by lobbying are, step by step, embodied in local administration and social services directives and circulars, and then diffused and standardized over the national territory by central government circulars. Senior public administrators and expert committees eventually filter and integrate these practices in the light of comparative policy studies and with a view to possible political outcomes; also they polish, adapt, and correct the practices to translate them into bills of law. Parliament will discuss and amend them according to party and intra-party alignments. The actual legislation will be the outcome of fights and compromises; even so, a good share of enlightment (expert committees) and benevolence (low strata lobbying) will still be present in the final product. Legislation originating from benevolent illegal practice will in turn be partially eroded by malevolent illegal practice, by circulars and decrees illegally used in fields constitutionally protected by law. A remarkable share of the decision making process takes place sheltered from party conflicts, from parliamentary action or from public opinion. This sort of ‘extra-political’ policy tends to greater significance when new party elites come to power, and to lesser when the new elite becomes established.