“It was not I who introduced the amendment to article 1 of the Zan bill relating to gender identity, but that reference was in Zan’s bill ”. He reveals it in an interview with Lanfranco Palazzolo per Radical Radio the deputy of Italy Viva, Lucia Annibali, which explains: “During the parliamentary work and during the examinations by the other Commissions, the need arose to define the various items that were introduced in the text, including gender. And we did this as a majority, also dividing the amendments. That’s all, there is nothing to invent”.
On the position of Fedez and of Chiara Ferragni, the parliamentarian observes: “This indifference about politics that sucks is unbearable. It is right that the public debate also involves other personalities, because we are a free and democratic country. However, an in-depth study on the merits is requested, because then I do not know how many have read this law or have understood it or have deepened it. And respect for parliamentary work is also asked, why we are in a Parliament that must legislate, we are not on television or on social networks. I don’t think this is good for anyone battle that has been waged with the sword on these issues. And it’s not good for those who claim these either rights, because if you claim them with violence and offenses, you have to ask yourself some questions “.
And he adds: “The text released in the Chamber was the result of a very complicated and very difficult compromise, because the debate on these issues is always very polluted. That there could be room for improvement we were and we are all aware of it. The Senate, however, has different numbers and works differently. If more can be done on the merits to make a bill more effective, clearer and more sustainable, I believe it is only an advantage. Then, these barricades are truly unbearable. It also happened in the Chamber, when I tried to do a study of the many issues that had emerged. Then – continue – I was already accused of wanting to block the Zan law, because then on these issues it works like this: you cannot say how you think or try to do parliamentary work, but either you are in favor or you are against. And this is really unbearable stuff. We must ask ourselves why the rights against hate and violence crimes are upheld, using and spreading hate, violence and insults everywhere. Then also some politicians who have contributed in this sense should question the quality of their work and their doing politics even within the public debate “.
Finally, Annibali defends his party: “We could certainly compare more. All these instrumental accusations of a relationship between Italia Viva and the Lega and the right are rather ridiculous. In the Chamber I, as the leader of the Commission, had tried to solicit a confrontation with the opposition of the time, including the Lega, to arrive at a work that was as harmonious and broad as possible, because on these issues, if you are intelligent, try to promote a confrontation and in any case the opposition, in my opinion, must always be respected in Parliament. And instead – he concludes – these barricades are chosen which are ideology, propaganda, a desire to demonstrate that if you remain firm on your positions, then you are more in favor of rights than those who instead promote political reasoning. This is not politics, but it is screaming and stubbornness and violence. I am sorry because every occasion is good to offend Matteo Renzi, our party and our work as parliamentarians. We have always tried to produce debates on the merits. If others lack the skills and the courage, that’s their problem”.