as foraging Abstract: The title of this paper is inspired by the words of an anonymous post that said "The pulpit is preaching " concluding "... I would have called to preach and scratching ..."
In recent days we are witnessing a real media bombardment against the development plan approved last city council by De Giorgi. The fact that the protagonists of this attack - local and provincial politicians, associations, political parties and sectors of the press - are engaging in what I believe is nothing more than a mere campaign to discredit the work of the administrative team, pushes me to intervene in order to refute point by point the various statements that have been produced in recent days.
PARTIES: The ecopacifisti have publicly stated (also on my blog, vds comments of prof. Calcagno Post "The question unusual") that the approved development is not necessary, because there are no problems living in Latimer since 1200 in the city there would be empty houses. Too bad that a lot of empty houses of which we speak are at the limit dell'agibilità and - to be inhabited - are in need of major renovations that drives up the final cost of over € 100,000.00. On the other hand, those who possess the few habitable houses, they look good and if they do sell and prices are always higher than € 100,000.00. This is the reason why the houses in Latimer have a price equal to twice the surrounding municipalities (these are irrefutable facts that anyone can see for themselves). Allowing you to build (among other things, with regard to Scaramouche, it is a right that the owners of those areas have already acquired some time) not only increases the supply side: the result will be an inevitable lowering of prices. The ecopacifisti then say that Latimer would be depopulated .... Of course: Many young couples, but spare the half on the purchase of a home, they prefer to live in those neighboring towns where the price of a home is much lower than Latimer. The aspects highlighted by ecopacifisti are undoubtedly related ... but in reverse: it is that you must give the possibility to build because people go away from Latimer, people go away from that Latimer is not given the opportunity to build .. .
provincial policy: I read a mishmash of allusions and heavy serious allegations contained in a statement of the municipal council and provincial Jewel Antonio. The same, however, also writes the views and opinions, always declared contrary to development plan, adding that the municipality some time should have been provided to cover "a more modern and appropriate development plan, Plan dated compared to Manufacture ". Giusto, for some time! Jewel but forget to join himself - for some time! - the local political scene ...: because in all these years has not translated into made his good intentions? What urban interventions has promoted throughout his political career? The political stagnation of recent years is perhaps not the most responsible for the current urban situation? Sure, Jewel has expressed disagreement on some proposals, demonstrating at least a degree of consistency, but it is also true that "destroy" does not mean "build" and that if certain solutions to certain problems are not shared, you should at least in contrast with alternatives and not demagoguery.
local policies: the Council also Argentieri (UDC) seems to have made a sort of implicit opposition to the development plan, endorsing the petition of 'Neverland'. But sorry, that was not Argentieri in January 2010 (when it was in full pre-election campaign) said verbatim on his blog (I invite you to read the full post by clicking HERE ) that "... for what concerns the urban structure and because of the state of severe crisis facing the local construction industry (...) we need to approve plans of subdivision affecting areas of completion as Scaramouche, wind mills, and Biondo via Salento ". Why now is the contrary? With those words, it was practically organized this type of urban intervention, in addition, as part of a party, these statements were probably shared, if not the rest of the coalition, at least from the rest of the UDC (UDC there is always that in dialogue and participation between the part). But then why the group UDC has not been presented at the last city council? In protest, they say. But what kind of protest? I agree or not, why not say it clearly?
ASSOCIATIONS: As we know the association 's "Neverland" has launched a petition to annul the decision on the apportionment of Scaramouche. Okay, it is an expression of democracy at all given the opportunity to produce opinions and contribute to building democracy in our country. I just want to remember, however, that the association in question was one step away from becoming the latest list of civic elections, in support of Mr. Giuliano, a reporter for Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno, and - if I remember correctly - a member of its' "Neverland." So, when someone - referring to the association on the subject - talking about civil society, is wrong (maybe deliberately): I think this is a real political force in local civil society is not, therefore, but real political movement.
EDITORS: A news should be confined to the mere exposure of a pure fact. The moment the news of the fact it adds just a personal observation of the journalist, we are faced with the product, not a journalist but a commentator . We are attentive to this detail because the difference is so subtle as fundamental. Also, when you add to personal considerations of the proposals alternatives to those (such as ...) of a local authority, we are no longer reading the thoughts of a columnist, but the precise policy positions taken by the person who seems to aspire to become itself a political actor. I firmly believe that it is legitimate to engage in an experience of political / administrative, looking with his own ideas to contribute to the community, not just I but have a powerful mass-media (such as a newspaper may be) to produce considerations of a political nature and, even, heavy hints about the morality of those who received the task of administering a democratic, albeit small, actually. This was the press - both right and left both local and national - daily demonstrates a preference for taking political positions to the natural role that it should do: the one and true narrative of the facts. Some items that we often happen to read are not in the "news", but are part of a clear political thought. Nothing against the freedom of political thought (God forbid), but the channels through which others should be explicitely. And anyway, I think that when a newspaper - as well as taking a political position - give space to political parties adverse to a project should at least give the same opportunity even to those who have believed in that project.
For this reason also to send them my views Gazzetta del Mezzogiorno: If the statement is published will have been given the opportunity to be heard. Otherwise, the non-appearance will be a fact that can only be explained as that each deems most congenial.
conclude by saying that, compared to the past, the current administration is characterized by the constant effort of trying to give answers to those years are the questions of citizens. Of course, certain choices can - immediately - not shared by some political parties, but these people who say they are averse I just ask, when you go from your living room products, you ever exchange a word with the common people? Have you ever explored the issues? Have you ever analyzed the difficulties?
Daniel
