Public procurement is governed by the "Code of public contracts for works, services and supplies" and the related "Implementation Rules": a set of rules abnormal. The Code has 257 articles and 22 annexes; Regulation has more 359 articles and 15 annexes. These orders are then related to the spending provisions contained in the Consolidated Local Authorities, and the residual accounting status with regard to public works statati. In short subject for super experts!

It's necessary a radical change.

The simplification of the regulatory framework must be the first pillar. Simplification should relate primarily to specifications. They should concern only the regulation of the relationship between the public interest and the interest of the economic operator involved, all the remaining apparatus must return to the rank of technical discipline, the contents of a project, for example, can not be provided by law without incurring errors and inconsistencies; and we can continue the list of provisions are ineffective, but this is not the place.

To understand the inadequacy of the legal system enough to observe the normal dynamics of public contracts through two significant indicators: compliance with the procedural and litigation. We must say that there are no statistics for this information, there is no data immediately consulted by the industry and the citizen. Even the Supervisory Authority for Public Works, today ANAC, despite the amount of data that each government is obliged to send to the Observatory at different stages of the procedure implementation of public contracts, does not publish these statistics, that would be illuminating. Then refer to our observations to our experience of the industry, gained both from the public administration, that the private operators (designers and companies) in the last 20 years even in the period of validity of the rules by Merloni onwards.

The first element that emerges from this experience is the widespread lack of respect for administrative time, from planning to design, from implementation to commissioning. The different phases of the legislation are generally experienced by public operators as mere fulfillment of a formal nature. In particular, the planning of measures, generally instead of being the result of assessments of needs and opportunities is the result of the composition of occasional interest, and as such objectively ridiscutibili and renegotiated according to the different interest groups represented, so that there is often a decisions already taken it back to re-discuss the need or the opportunity of the intervention with enormous waste of time and resources. Then there are the delays related to the inadequacy of human resources put in place, but we will discuss this in greater detail when it comes to the role of Head of procedures and Designers. Then there is the enormous conflict that the system generated, so it is rare that there is a process of spending that directors not the establishment of a dispute both in the choice of the contractor, that the execution of the contract. In short we can say that the distinctive god this scenario is the uncertainty. So paradoxically this mountain of rules instead of providing clear evidence of the conduct of public spending is, in our view, the main element of insecurity. Insecurity, the smoke screens of rules difficult to understand, in red tape as well as the pathological lurk litigation lurks even the most damaging viruses of corruption.

It is clear that any trader needs to realize on time, or better as quickly as possible and smoothly its activities. So each will "equip" according to its sensitivity. Many are, as we have heard in some statements made recently also by representatives of large companies, which "must make a virtue of necessity" to stay in the market. So it is in the presence of a "subculture" where the end always justifies the means even the most deteriorate as the corruption brought to light once again blatantly by the investigations of 2014 (EXPO, MOSE, reconstruction of L'Aquila, Mafia Capital , etc.). A weed eradication difficult!

Only if the rules are understood by everyone, everyone can exercise a civilian and democratic control, without having to delegate that responsibility to only essential investigative bodies and the judiciary with an objective disproportion of forces.