I saw further confirmation of the great potential of Italy and of the Italian corporate sector, but I also found unanimous agreement that one of the most important problems facing Italy is the insufficient labour productivity and consequently the rise of unit labour costs. It is a European problem, and not only an Italian problem, but in Italy it is particularly visible: we have to do all that we can to implement the Lisbon agenda aiming at accelerating productivity growth. But the Italian industrial structure is weak nowadays. What should be done? Research carried out in Italy and in Europe, more generally, has concluded that we are not benefiting sufficiently from productivity gains in sectors that use new technology (and not only in the sectors that produce the technology themselves) and this seems to be due to overly rigid labour, goods and services and financial markets. Structural reforms that would allow the economy to be made more flexible are the primary tools for achieving a leap in productivity. In the United States this was made possible in the mid-1990s. And, consequently? One should never underestimate the importance of investment in research and development, which are today insufficient both in Italy and in the euro area as a whole. You have mentioned structural reforms, which are currently at the heart of the Italian political debate on developments in the finance laws. Let us begin with the deficit-to–GDP ratio, which is well above the 3% limit. Is the situation in Italy a cause for concern for you?
Structural reforms of this sort have been decided upon by national governments within the framework of the agreements made in Lisbon and we should not forget that the ultimate objective is to increase the pace of economic growth in order to ensure more prosperity and provide more jobs for everyone, which is fundamental for the weakest and the poorest. Rather than finding a compromise between the various members of our society, between those that have costs and those that reap the benefits, I see it more as a compromise between the present and future. It is a forwardlooking investment and a better future for the weakest part of the population which entails costs at the beginning. And in any case let us not forget that we cannot ask our children and grandchildren to pay our bills! In Europe, the population is shrinking to the point that by 2020, according to different studies, there will be 20 million people available for work. In the United States, it is on the rise. How is this? Perhaps this is because the United States is a population with entire generations of immigrants in which the birth rate is higher. And then there is the cultural aspect, they are more optimistic than us. Why? This involves philosophical and cultural aspects and I am not convinced that they are structural.