Giorgia Meloni's interview on Tg1. Don't miss it!

President, what does this reform of justice represent and what does the ANM respond to, for which it alters the set of powers? I think that the reform of justice represents a historical occasion of having a more efficient and fairer justice. These are good sense rules. Separation of careers, which means strengthening the third party of the judge, therefore a fairer process. High disciplinary court, which means that when a judge makes a mistake tomorrow, he will finally take responsibility for it. And the drafting of the components of the CSM, which means freeing the judiciary from politicized currents and therefore valuing merit. I do not agree with the ANM. Besides, I don't remember a time when the ANM was in favor of any reform of justice. So their idea is that everything is fine. It is not the idea that we have of justice and probably not even that of the citizens. Now the game of the referendum will open. Will there be a consultation on justice or will there also be political profiles? No, I believe that there must be a consultation on justice. First of all, because there will not be consequences for the government in any case. You are talking about the referendum, of course. We will arrive at the end of the legislature and we will ask the Italians to be judged for the complexity of the work we have done. But also because I want to remind everyone that governments pass and instead laws, especially constitutional ones, remain and affect the lives of citizens. So I think it is an easier choice. Those who think that in justice everything is fine will be able to control the reform, so they will vote no. Those who think that instead they can improve will vote in favor of the reform, so they will vote yes. Now we are at the stop of the Court of Audits on the bridge on the roof. What will the government do and how does it respond? The Accounting Magistrate says that it is essentially committed to exclusively legal profiles. Look, to the Accounting Magistrate I want to say that I was frankly a little curious about some highlights, such as the one in which we were asked for what reason we had shared part of the documentation via link, because we would like to answer why there is internet. After that the government will wait for the highlights, it will respond to the highlights. Let it be clear that the goal is to build the bridge on the Strait of Messina, which is a strategic work, it will be a unique engineering work in the world, because I also want to say this, we are heirs of a civilization that with its bridges has won the world over for millennia. And I do not resign myself to the idea that it can no longer be done today because we are suffocated by the bureaucracy and by the hair. A point on the manoeuvre, will there be changes on the contribution of the banks or on the short rents? On the contribution of the banks I do not believe, I continue to say that in my opinion it is a good sign that the resources are put on the workers, on the companies that take over, on the families, on the birth, on the health, and that a contribution to banks and insurances is asked. On the short rents, in my opinion, the Parliament must decide whether to confirm or not the rule. I just want to say that the ratio of the procedure is not to make cash on the issue of rents, but to favor the rents to the families, because it is evident that if there is the same transaction for those who rent to a tourist and for those who rent to a family, it will tend to rent to the tourist and the rents for the families will increase. So our goal is to lower the rents for the families.