What changed

MOTION FOR A EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT RESOLUTION

P10_TA(2025)0188

on possibilitiesPossibilities for simplification of cohesion funds

(2024/2106(INI))

Committee on Regional Development

PE769.947

European Parliament resolution of 10 September 2025 on possibilities for simplification of cohesion funds (2024/2106(INI))

The European Parliament,

B. whereas regional cooperation can act as a catalyst for innovation and resilience, and cohesion policy instruments should enable such cooperation to flourish across territorial and administrative boundaries;

✦ Formal Replaces semicolon with comma after 'learning' in recital C.

C. whereas cohesion policy plays a pivotal role in delivering on the European Pillar of Social Rights, its action plan, and the headline targets aimed at tackling poverty, increasing employment and promoting lifelong learning ;learning; whereas conditionality related to the rule of law, as well as to social and human rights standards, is indispensable and must not be undermined by simplification efforts; whereas access to cohesion policy funding must ensure the protection and inclusion of all people in their regions, regardless of gender, age, nationality, health status, social class, ethnicity, sexual orientation or gender identity;

D. whereas cohesion policy funding accounts for approximately 30 % of the total budget of the EU and serves as a key pillar in supporting European regions, and it should remain distinct and not be pooled with other funds in the future multiannual financial framework (MFF) to ensure its effectiveness in reducing territorial disparities and fostering economic convergence;

29. Acknowledges that liquidity problems discourage potential beneficiaries, including local authorities, which suffer in some Member States from a lack of fiscal and budgetary autonomy, from applying for cohesion policy-funded projects; calls, therefore, for a significant and tailored increase in pre-financing in such cases and also in rural, cross-border and insular areas to support the rapid disbursement of cohesion policy funds, along with a simplification of co-financing rules;

✦ Formal Changes decimal separator in '9.5' to '9,5' in paragraph 30.

30. Welcomes the Commission’s proposal, in its mid-term review of cohesion policy 2021-2027, that programmes under the ‘Investment for jobs and growth’ goal, carried out in NUTS 2 regions that have borders with Russia, Belarus or Ukraine, should benefit from the possibility of a one-off 9.59,5 % pre-financing of the programme allocation and 100 % EU financing; urges the Commission to propose additional measures to address the needs of the Eastern border regions of the EU;

31. Expresses its concern about the regular reports from stakeholders on the lack of application of horizontal principles by Member States in the preparation of partnership agreements; suggests that a revised European Code of Conduct on Partnership should be integrated directly into the CPR, to ensure its binding nature and cover direct management programmes with territorial impact; calls on the Commission to strictly enforce the application of the partnership principle, explore measures to enhance Parliament’s oversight and monitoring powers on partnership agreements and programmes; calls on the Commission to ensure that the Member States perform regular oversight, including of partners during monitoring and expert selection to guarantee competence and prevent fraud;

47. Instructs its President to forward this resolution to the Council and the Commission, and to the European Court of Auditors, the European Economic and Social Committee, the Committee of the Regions and the national and regional parliaments of the Member States.

EXPLANATORY STATEMENT

The rapporteur acknowledges the improvements introduced in the 2021-2027 programming period, such as a reduced list of policy objectives, a clearer intervention logic through indicators, lighter reporting and the implementation of the single audit.

Despite these advancements, managing authorities, intermediary bodies, beneficiaries, and citizens continue to face significant administrative burdens. “In some Member States, Cohesion Policy funding is avoided in favour of less complex and less risky domestic funding”. This quote, which comes from the report of the High-Level Group on the Future of Cohesion Policy (February 2024), unveils an uncomfortable, yet currently widely spread perception of the policy on the ground. Frequent regulatory changes and the practice of gold-plating - where additional national rules are imposed on top of EU laws - have partially undermined simplification efforts. Moreover, small projects continue to bear disproportionately higher administrative burdens for beneficiaries and greater administrative costs for programme authorities compared to larger projects. Such situations negatively affect the credibility and public perception of cohesion policy, which is currently also coinciding with a programming period that has been already heavily delayed and modified at legislative level due to global geopolitical and health crises. Low visibility and a lack of knowledge of the source of cohesion-funded projects amongst citizens is another aspect that needs to be remedied in future funding cycles to improve the awareness of EU funds and their positive impact on the ground. While it is historically normal that the implementation rate of funds in the first half of any MFF, ahead of the mid-term review, is rising more slowly compared to its second half, further simplification measures are nevertheless necessary to enhance the policy’s efficiency. The EU needs a more stable way of realising cohesion policy that alleviates the pressure of such waves of intensity in implementation that are partially caused by too complex regulations and rules, as the concentration of projects in the final years of the programming cycle is problematic not only at an economic level, but also with regards to inflation and quality management.

The rapporteur emphasises that simplification measures must strike a balance between ensuring easier access to funding and protecting the EU budget. Furthermore, these efforts should always align with the core principles of cohesion policy, including shared management, the partnership principle, multi-level governance, subsidiarity, and the place-based approach.

Through this draft report, the rapporteur puts forward several recommendations. These include promoting a bottom-up approach, reducing the number of Funds, establishing an integrated IT interface for beneficiaries, and introducing a broader set of well-being indices and indicators to complement GDP. Other proposals include earmarking cohesion resources for integrated territorial development tools such as CLLD and ITI, exploring the mandatory enforcement of a revised European Code of Conduct on Partnership, reducing redundant controls and audits that duplicate national oversight for the same projects and beneficiaries, and considering direct funding for cities. Additionally, the rapporteur opposes any form of top-down centralisation of cohesion policy while acknowledging certain positive elements within the RRF.

The rapporteur believes that enhancing simplification is essential to strengthening cohesion policy as a whole. He also highlights that this policy has played a fundamental role in addressing the multi-dimensional emergencies and challenges of the past five years. In this context, the rapporteur underscores, however, the need to uphold the long-term investment, solidarity, and place-based principles that define cohesion policy. He also advocates for the continued and obligatory involvement of local and regional authorities at all stages, including programming, implementation, delivery, monitoring, and evaluation of projects.

With this draft report, the rapporteur aims to contribute meaningfully and constructively to the discussion on the future cohesion policy, particularly in light of the forthcoming Commission proposal on the Multiannual Financial Framework 2028-2034 and the accompanying legislative package of sectoral proposals.