![](https://www.fedaiisf.it/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/fedaiisf-ARCHIVIO-STORICO-780x450.jpg)
The comparison at the presentation of some amendments to the decree proposed by the I-Com association. For Cosentino the provision is "a manifesto of good intentions". For Fitto, the real urgency is the redefinition of federalism and its responsibilities.
25 SEPT – A discussion outside the Palace but with many political representatives, the one promoted by the Institute for Competitiveness and held today in Rome.
According to Sen. Lionel Cosentino, "beyond the mere reason of urgency dictated by the expiry of the legislation on intramoenia, in the provision there are many declarations of principle or manifest rules".
For the democratic senator, the Balduzzi decree will not bring about any significant reform; in particular on the issue of doctors' liability "I don't see why a doctor working in an accredited public or private facility should respond personally to patients while a citizen who suffers an accident with public transport does not ask the driver for compensation but to the transport company”. As for the issue of primary care, “I doubt – said the Pd senator – that it is useful to base the system on the relaunch of supply, while with the little money available, it would be necessary to link spending to health results. Let's take the 5-6 main pathologies and indicate the objectives on which to invest the resources we have. To do all this, however, it is necessary to restore Title V of the Constitution by reviewing the regional competences on health ".
On the same wavelength the deputy PdL Raffaele Fitto, also convinced that the real issue is federalism which, in order to survive its many degeneration, should be based on the principle of responsibility. “We cannot continue – thundered the former governor of Puglia – with a system for allocating health care costs entrusted to negotiations between Regions based on non-transparent criteria, far from the actual needs of the population. The same arbitrary logic was followed in the spending review where it was decided to always hit the same sector because it is easily identifiable, pharmaceuticals, continuing not to consider the real waste which, for example, lurks in hospital spending