Giuseppe Orsi arrest highlights Italian politics' odd relationship with business

Finmeccanica chief arrested.

Giuseppe Orsi, the chairman of Italian giant defence and aerospace group Finmeccanica, was arrested on Tuesday on suspicion of corruption.

The investigation relates to the sale of 12 helicopters to the Indian government by AgustaWestland, the high tech helicopter unit of Finmeccanica back in 2010, at which time Orsi was at the division’s helm.

He now stands accused of bribing the Indian government to secure the sale. And he is not alone: the current managing director of AgustaWestland is under house arrest, an option not considered for Orsi, who judges said could potentially pervert the course of justice.

Unsurprisingly, Finmeccanica shares have tanked after initially being suspended, falling by more than 9 per cent to €4.236.

And this is merely the first layer of a complex story. According to the judge, bribery was “part of the firm’s philosophy” – hardly a compliment, but definitely less flattering considering the fact that the State is a 30 per cent shareholder in the business.

Finmeccanica has expressed solidarity with Mr Orsi, but Prime Minister Mario Monti declared, in his understated manner, that “there is a problem with respect to Finmeccanica governance that we will have to tackle”.

That’s certainly a good idea. But it is worth considering that it was Monti himself that appointed Mr Orsi as chairman at the end of 2011, following investigations into the practices of previous chairman Pier Francesco Guarguaglini and his wife, then head of another Finmeccanica subsidiary.

Orsi’s arrest comes just one day after the resignation of the Pope and it is possibly one of the few stories capable of pushing that news down to second place on Italian newspapers… Primarily because there is an election around the corner, and the German-born Vatican resident tends not to be active in local politics.

It’s election time, which has proven to be during the years intense and tiring time for the judiciary.

Investigations are still ongoing on Monte dei Paschi di Siena, the oldest bank in the world and the third largest in Italy by assets.

Not to be outdone, the head of State-owned energy company Eni Paolo Scaroni has received notice that he is under investigation for bribery.

And let’s not forget, that Italy’s technocrat saviour, and whose appointee is under arrest - Mario Monti - is running for office, as is the man most synonymous with Italian political intrigue - Silvio Berlusconi.

So, are we likely to see major changes and a clean up as a result of these elections? God knows! Or does he… It’s hard to tell now his spokesperson has thrown in the towel.

Giuseppe Orsi. Photograph: Getty Images

Sara Perria is the Assistant Editor for Banking and Payments, VRL Financial News

Getty Images.
Show Hide image

Brexit is teaching the UK that it needs immigrants

Finally forced to confront the economic consequences of low migration, ministers are abandoning the easy rhetoric of the past.

Why did the UK vote to leave the EU? For conservatives, Brexit was about regaining parliamentary sovereignty. For socialists it was about escaping the single market. For still more it was a chance to punish David Cameron and George Osborne. But supreme among the causes was the desire to reduce immigration.

For years, as the government repeatedly missed its target to limit net migration to "tens of thousands", the EU provided a convenient scapegoat. The free movement of people allegedly made this ambition unachievable (even as non-European migration oustripped that from the continent). When Cameron, the author of the target, was later forced to argue that the price of leaving the EU was nevertheless too great, voters were unsurprisingly unconvinced.

But though the Leave campaign vowed to gain "control" of immigration, it was careful never to set a formal target. As many of its senior figures knew, reducing net migration to "tens of thousands" a year would come at an economic price (immigrants make a net fiscal contribution of £7bn a year). An OBR study found that with zero net migration, public sector debt would rise to 145 per cent of GDP by 2062-63, while with high net migration it would fall to 73 per cent. For the UK, with its poor productivity and sub-par infrastructure, immigration has long been an economic boon. 

When Theresa May became Prime Minister, some cabinet members hoped that she would abolish the net migration target in a "Nixon goes to China" moment. But rather than retreating, the former Home Secretary doubled down. She regards the target as essential on both political and policy grounds (and has rejected pleas to exempt foreign students). But though the same goal endures, Brexit is forcing ministers to reveal a rarely spoken truth: Britain needs immigrants.

Those who boasted during the referendum of their desire to reduce the number of newcomers have been forced to qualify their remarks. On last night's Question Time, Brexit secretary David Davis conceded that immigration woud not invariably fall following Brexit. "I cannot imagine that the policy will be anything other than that which is in the national interest, which means that from time to time we’ll need more, from time to time we’ll need less migrants."

Though Davis insisted that the government would eventually meet its "tens of thousands" target (while sounding rather unconvinced), he added: "The simple truth is that we have to manage this problem. You’ve got industry dependent on migrants. You’ve got social welfare, the national health service. You have to make sure they continue to work."

As my colleague Julia Rampen has charted, Davis's colleagues have inserted similar caveats. Andrea Leadsom, the Environment Secretary, who warned during the referendum that EU immigration could “overwhelm” Britain, has told farmers that she recognises “how important seasonal labour from the EU is to the everyday running of your businesses”. Others, such as the Health Secretary, Jeremy Hunt, the Business Secretary, Greg Clark, and the Communities Secretary, Sajid Javid, have issued similar guarantees to employers. Brexit is fuelling immigration nimbyism: “Fewer migrants, please, but not in my sector.”

The UK’s vote to leave the EU – and May’s decision to pursue a "hard Brexit" – has deprived the government of a convenient alibi for high immigration. Finally forced to confront the economic consequences of low migration, ministers are abandoning the easy rhetoric of the past. Brexit may have been caused by the supposed costs of immigration but it is becoming an education in its benefits.

George Eaton is political editor of the New Statesman.