Il Piano Casa è legge con la fiducia. Salvini: 'Ora si deve correre'. Le organizzazioni degli inquilini: 'Inadeguato all'emergenza'

The Italian Senate has given final approval to the “Piano Casa” law, passing it with 106 votes in favour, 62 against and two abstentions. The decree, originally tied to a confidence vote by the government, becomes law after the Chamber of Deputies had already dismissed it. Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni and Vice‑Premier Matteo Salvini, leader of the Lega, championed the measure, presenting it as a decisive step toward addressing the country’s housing shortage.

Proponents highlight that the law aims to reactivate around 60,000 vacant public homes, allocating funds and personnel to refurbish them within months. They claim the plan will create 100,000 new homes over ten years, offering affordable housing for young couples and families on waiting lists. The government stresses that the initiative turns “words into deeds,” citing a commitment made at the 2025 Rimini meeting for a large‑scale, price‑controlled housing programme.

Four major tenant organisations—Sunia, Sicet, Uniat and Unione Inquilini—label the law “inadequate for the emergency.” They argue that the €970 million earmarked for five years is insufficient to renovate the estimated 60,000‑100,000 empty public units, let alone meet the needs of roughly 350,000 families awaiting social housing. Critics warn that the plan could lead to the sale of public assets without reinvestment, potentially reducing the overall public housing stock.

The legislation proposes a modest €16,000 per unit for refurbishing 60,000 public homes, a figure described by critics as too low to cover more than façade repairs. Additionally, the law introduces a “70/33” system: 33 % of units would be subject to capped rents, while the remaining 70 % could be priced at market rates, raising concerns about speculative exploitation. The super‑commissioner’s office is allocated €1 million annually, with the chief receiving over €34,000 per month, a point highlighted by opponents as excessive.

Key provisions allow for the alienation of parts of the public residential stock and the change of use for recovered buildings. Critics fear this could undermine long‑term social housing provision. The law also speeds up eviction procedures without strengthening municipal tools to address the housing crisis, a measure contested by tenant unions as potentially harmful to vulnerable households.

For a pan‑European audience focused on sustainable housing, the “Piano Casa” illustrates a tension between rapid activation of existing stock and the risk of undermining affordable, long‑term solutions. While re‑using vacant public buildings aligns with sustainability goals by reducing new construction, the limited refurbishment budget and market‑rate rent provisions may limit social equity outcomes. The debate underscores the importance of adequate financing, transparent asset management, and safeguards against privatisation when repurposing public housing assets across Europe.