Urbanities,
Vol. 3
·
No 2
·
November 2013
© 2013
Urbanities
40
local citizens’ expectations versus global competitive processes. It is also important to
remember that some of the associations opposed to the Bridge are local groups specifically
created to stop the project for specifically local reasons. To summarize chronologically, the
key points in the conflict have been: 1) the negative effects of the infrastructure in terms of
environmental impact; 2) the unsustainability of the Bridge from an engineering-related
standpoint; 3) the uselessness of the infrastructure in terms of local economy and
employment. To support these key points, the RNP network have organized large meetings
and demonstrations in order to put forward their viewpoint and mobilize citizens on the issue.
This movement proposes alternative reasons, also based on local experience, on all issues
related to the Bridge. A RPN activist stated, ‘There is no definitive estimate of the costs and
benefits of the infrastructure […] the seismic risks characterizing the area might cause a major
disaster [moreover] the “Stretto di Messina S.p.A.” must be closed, and the public money at
the disposal of the Inter-ministerial Committee for Economic Programming must be spent on
the real emergencies in Southern Italy [because] unless the whole southern mobility network
is changed, the Messina Bridge will be a useless infrastructure, a white elephant!’ Another
activist said, ‘We want proximity structures, small public works locally useful and not major
public works that cause inconvenience. We want small roads and small Bridges which do not
collapse because of floods or bad weather! We want the whole southern area, the whole of
Sicily, to be secure; we just want many small things, which could lead to employment, as well
as to a new sense of identity and growing awareness.’
The RNP published several articles and comments on its official website regarding to
the action strategies of the General Contractor ‘Eurolink’ and the ‘Stretto di Messina S.p.A.’
company.
6
They focus on the relationships, sometimes described as not transparent, between
the many public actors involved in the infrastructure intervention (Regions, Ministries,
Municipalities) and the companies to which the contract has been awarded. The activists want
to highlight the ‘bribery’, ‘special interests’, and ‘waste of public resources’ tainting the
‘Stretto di Messina S.p.A’, its managing director, and the General Contractor. In the words of
an activist, ‘Through the project-financing some private interests come into play [...]. They
will exploit the Bridge for many years regaining the money they have spent also thanks to
public intervention. Usually, it states that they will obtain more than what they have invested
and a part of their profits will go back to the State and the local authorities. But this is
impossible, because the number of Bridge passages will be inferior in comparison to the
forecast quantity. In this way the profit of private actors is connected to the waste of public
funds.
As it has been recently underlined (Della Porta and Piazza 2008), an interesting aspect
of the movement against the Bridge is that its members attempt to develop a discussion
capable of countering the accusation of localism, shifting frequently from a local discourse to
a global one. For them, these infrastructures are a danger to the common good. A RNP
6
The RNP’s website carries the daily update of a virtual meeting place. Here, the movement
publicises all its activities and collects articles about the economy and society of the Messina Strait.
Obviously, particular attention is given to the political and administrative aspects connected to the
construction of the Bridge.
