Sittings · Document
OPINION (2024/2106(INI)) 2025-06-04
On the possibilities for simplification of cohesion funds
Committee on Budgets · Rapporteur: Isabel Benjumea Benjumea
AMENDMENT
The Committee on Budgets submits the following to the Committee on Regional Development, as the committee responsible:
Amendment 1
Motion for a resolution
Recital A
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| A. whereas cohesion policy is the EU’s most important investment tool to reduce social, territorial and economic disparities, and its long-term character should not be jeopardised by emergency measures and amendments aimed at re-purposing cohesion funds for other priorities; | A. whereas cohesion policy is the EU’s most important investment tool to reduce social, territorial and economic disparities and for sustainable economic and social development across the EU, and its long-term character should not be jeopardised by emergency measures and amendments aimed at re-purposing cohesion funds for other priorities; whereas cohesion policy is a concrete expression of European solidarity and crucial in supporting vulnerable groups and those at risk of poverty; whereas it is of utmost importance to formulate any future cohesion policy with a strategic impetus that is followed during the entire funding period; |
Amendment 2
Motion for a resolution
Recital A a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Aa. 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; |
Amendment 3
Motion for a resolution
Recital D
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| D. whereas, however, managing authorities, intermediary bodies, beneficiaries and citizens still face significant administrative burdens and challenges that not only affect the implementation rate of the projects but also undermine the credibility, visibility and perception of cohesion policy as a whole; | D. whereas, however, managing authorities, intermediary bodies, beneficiaries and citizens still face significant administrative burdens and challenges that not only affect the implementation rate of the projects but also undermine the credibility, visibility, effectiveness and perception of cohesion policy as a whole; whereas excessive bureaucracy, regulatory overlaps and the lack of a unified implementation framework hinder Member States’ ability – especially that of local authorities, SMEs and smaller beneficiaries – to access available funds; |
Amendment 4
Motion for a resolution
Recital D a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Da. whereas for the 2023 financial year, the error rate in EU expenditure was mainly driven by spending under cohesion policy, which accounted for 3.5 percentage points of the overall 5.6 % error rate, according to the European Court of Auditors; |
Amendment 5
Motion for a resolution
Recital D b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| Db. whereas the establishment of the Recovery and Resilience Facility and the implementation deadline of 2026 for Member States led many national governments to prioritise the fulfilment of the milestones and targets of this facility over the implementation of funds under cohesion policy; whereas the delays in the submission of the partnership agreements by the Member States and the slow pace of implementation of the 2021-2027 programmes, as well as the request for an extension of the previous 2014-2020 programmes, are partly explained by this prioritisation; whereas the burden on national and regional public administrations and the consequent difficulty in executing funds and implementing programmes must be taken into account in future to avoid difficulties in the management of cohesion policy funds; |
Amendment 6
Motion for a resolution
Recital E
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| E. whereas the evolving and complex regulatory environment has played a decisive role in the current low implementation rate of cohesion policy in all Member States; | E. whereas the evolving and complex regulatory environment, as well as the simultaneous fulfilment of milestones and targets linked to the Recovery and Resilience Facility, has played a decisive role in the challenges of accessing funding, particularly for smaller municipalities, SMEs and civil society organisations, and in the current low implementation rate of cohesion policy in all Member States; whereas by the end of 2024, only 5.4 % of the cohesion policy funds allocated for the 2021-2027 period had been spent; |
Amendment 7
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 1. Recalls the fundamental role cohesion policy has played in addressing multi-dimensional emergencies and challenges over the last five years and stresses the need to keep its long-term investment and place-based rationale and priorities; | 1. Recalls the fundamental role cohesion policy has played in addressing multi-dimensional emergencies and challenges over the last five years and stresses the need to keep its long-term investment and place-based rationale and priorities in line with its Treaty objectives of economic, social and territorial cohesion; stresses that the cohesion policy framework is not an emergency instrument and should preserve its strategic impetus and long-term vision together with a strong regional dimension and territorial approach; calls on the Commission to clearly reaffirm its support for maintaining and strengthening this policy beyond 2027; |
Amendment 8
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 1a. Calls for cohesion policy to remain a top funding priority in the post-2027 MFF based on a coherent diagnostic and forward-looking strategy that guarantees continuity and predictability for beneficiaries, and warns against potential budgetary cuts or disproportionate macroeconomic conditionalities; |
Amendment 9
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 1 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 1b. Points out that any simplification efforts should promote the EU’s overall harmonious development in line with Article 174 TFEU, with budgetary measures paying particular attention to regions which suffer from severe and permanent natural or demographic handicaps and face significant challenges related to depopulation, such as the northernmost regions with a very low population density and island, cross-border and mountain regions; |
Amendment 10
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2a. Stresses that future simplification measures should focus on beneficiaries, with the aim of scrapping unnecessary red tape and ensuring better access to funds and the uninterrupted implementation of cohesion policy programmes; calls on the Commission to continue to simplify and promote cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation and to make credible proposals for the reinforcement and modernisation of cohesion policy; recalls that simplification must not undermine the principles of good administration, transparency and accountability; |
Amendment 11
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 2 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 2b. Calls on the Commission, in light of the ongoing revision of Directive 2014/25/EU1a, to increase the current public procurement thresholds that trigger EU tendering obligations, with a view to easing administrative burdens on small and medium-sized cohesion projects, particularly at local and municipal levels; ______________ 1a Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC, OJ L 94, 28.3.2014, p. 243, ELI: http://data.europa.eu/eli/dir/2014/25/oj. |
Amendment 12
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 3
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 3. Calls on the Commission to promote a bottom-up approach in the upcoming proposals for simplifying the design of the new cohesion policy, ensuring the mandatory consultation and involvement of LRAs, civil society organisations and small and medium-sized enterprises; | 3. Calls on the Commission to promote a bottom-up approach in the upcoming proposals for simplifying the design of the new cohesion policy, adopting a beneficiary-oriented approach that focuses on the real needs of citizens, families and businesses; underlines that the simplification process must be impact-driven rather than merely administrative efficiency-based, and should include the mandatory consultation and involvement of LRAs, social partners, civil society organisations and small and medium-sized enterprises and ensure that feedback mechanisms are in place to allow these actors to influence not only programming, but also simplification procedures and monitoring criteria; |
Amendment 13
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 4a. Recalls that, owing to a lack of flexibility in the EU budget, cohesion policy resources have been used and re-purposed as a response to different emergencies, including emergencies outside the scope of cohesion policy, thus putting the achievement of policy objectives at risk; considers that cohesion funding should include a limited degree of flexibility to react to unforeseen situations within the remit of cohesion policy, without compromising its primary objective of economic, social and territorial cohesion; considers that a more flexible policy should not lead to financial uncertainty and increased complexities for end beneficiaries and should not jeopardise the long-term objectives of the policy; |
Amendment 14
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 b (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 4b. Considers that the current documentation, reporting and burden of proof requirements for applying for cohesion funds remain disproportionately burdensome for small beneficiaries, particularly municipalities and local public bodies with limited administrative capacity; calls for simplified standards based on project size and risk, and for enhanced use of digital tools and pre-filled templates, as well as lump sums, where appropriate; recalls the importance of ex post scrutiny; |
Amendment 15
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 4 c (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 4c. Calls for simplified and integrated implementation frameworks and a single entry point avoiding proliferation of parallel funding schemes, and for the alignment of eligibility criteria, reporting requirements and audit procedures to ensure that compliance systems are proportionate to project size and the administrative burden for beneficiaries is minimised; |
Amendment 16
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 5
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 5. Points out that the active and obligatory involvement of LRAs in the preparation, programming, implementation, delivery, monitoring and evaluation of projects in the areas they administer is a fundamental pre-condition for successful and tailored simplification; | 5. Points out that the active and obligatory involvement of LRAs in the preparation, programming, implementation, delivery, monitoring and evaluation of projects in the areas they administer is a fundamental pre-condition for successful and tailored simplification, particularly in terms of identifying administrative bottlenecks, proposing targeted adjustments that reflect on-the-ground realities and strengthening cooperation; |
Amendment 17
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6. Calls on the Commission to explore the inclusion of a territorial and governance impact assessment in the European Semester and the proposal of a broader set of well-being indices and indicators that could complement GDP in the distribution key, with the aim of further reducing disparities, including at intra-regional level, and of enabling better targeted investments where they are needed most; | 6. Calls on the Commission to explore the inclusion of a territorial and governance impact assessment in the European Semester and the proposal of a broader set of well-being indices and indicators that could complement GDP in the distribution key, with the aim of further reducing disparities, including at intra-regional level, and of enabling better targeted investments where they are needed most, while remaining simple, evidence-based, transparent and predictable; |
Amendment 18
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 6 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 6a. Expresses its concern about further strengthening the link between cohesion policy funding and reforms, especially considering the lack of consultation with the Member States in formulating the country-specific recommendations; |
Amendment 19
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 7
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 7. Suggests exploring different options for the mandatary allocation of a certain share of the cohesion policy budget to both CLLD and ITI; | 7. Encourages the Member States to make strategic use of integrated regional development tools such as ITI and CLLD and of local action groups and urban action groups; suggests exploring the mandatary allocation of a certain share of the cohesion policy budget to both CLLD and ITI; calls for dedicated and predictable financing for ITI, especially in the early stages, to ensure its continued role in integrated and place-based territorial development strategies; |
Amendment 20
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 8
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 8. Opposes any form of top-down centralisation reform of the cohesion policy; acknowledges, however, some positive elements currently being developed within the Recovery and Resilience Facility, but draws attention to the fact that in programmes under direct management, the disbursement of funds to Member States does not necessarily reflect the quantity and importance of the milestones and targets included therein; stresses that the centralised model has highlighted several critical issues, including regarding the traceability of EU funding; | 8. Opposes any form of top-down centralisation reform of the cohesion policy and recalls the importance of safeguarding the role of regional and local authorities; acknowledges, however, some positive elements currently being developed within the Recovery and Resilience Facility, but draws attention to the fact that in programmes under direct management, the disbursement of funds to Member States does not necessarily reflect the quantity and importance of the milestones and targets included therein; stresses that the centralised model has highlighted several critical issues, including regarding the traceability of EU funding; recalls that the reports of the European Court of Auditors on the Recovery and Resilience Facility point to the difficulties in tracing these funds, the insufficient transparency and interoperability of national platforms and the absence of evaluations that verify the impact of milestones and targets; |
Amendment 21
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10. Acknowledges that liquidity problems deter potential beneficiaries such as municipalities from applying for cohesion policy funded projects and therefore calls for a significant and tailored increase in pre-financing in such cases; | 10. Acknowledges that liquidity problems and limited administrative capacity, combined with long reimbursement timelines and co-financing challenges, deter potential beneficiaries such as municipalities, especially small ones, and less developed regions from applying for cohesion policy-funded projects and therefore calls for a tailored increase in pre-financing in such cases; |
Amendment 22
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 10 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 10a. Stresses the importance of simplified rules in public procurement procedures, especially in terms of allowing necessary and justified modifications during the tender process without the need for cancellation; |
Amendment 23
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12. Calls on the Commission to propose further measures to prevent and avoid double funding, to ensure the interoperability of data-mining tools, and to ensure a balance between simplification and protection of the EU budget; | 12. Calls on the Commission to propose further measures to prevent and avoid double funding, to ensure the interoperability of data-mining tools and a mandatory interoperability framework between EU and national databases on beneficiaries, ensuring real-time data exchange on final recipients of funds, and to ensure a balance between simplification and protection of the EU budget, taking as a reference the recommendations expressed by the European Court of Auditors in its reports; underlines that double structures should be avoided and responsibilities under shared management clearly allocated; |
Amendment 24
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 12 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 12a. Considers that an approach should be taken that better matches the implementation cycle, featuring lower payment needs at the beginning of the period with the payment ceilings defined in the MFF that have a more linear profile; stresses that simplification should contribute to significantly increasing absorption rates; calls on the Commission to assess administrative hurdles at national and regional levels and to propose targeted solutions to improve fund accessibility; |
Amendment 25
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 13 a (new)
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 13a. Underlines that cohesion policy should promote economic growth in the regions to make them attractive to investment, to create and develop companies, in particular SMEs, and to create jobs and generate opportunities; recalls the importance of synergies and coordination with other EU funds and instruments and therefore encourages stronger public-private cooperation in projects funded under EU cohesion policy, with the aim of bringing innovation, expertise and additional resources into local development, while preserving public responsibility in strategic planning; |
Amendment 26
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 14
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 14. Stresses the need to increase investments in building effective administrative capacity, especially in LRAs, with a view to encouraging effective decentralised management and implementation of EU funds, and highlights that cohesion policy outcomes rely on forward-looking and inclusive strategy, on proper stakeholder involvement and on good governance; | 14. Stresses the need to increase investments in building effective administrative capacity through targeted dedicated technical assistance and funding, especially in LRAs with historically low absorption rates and facing implementation difficulties, and for strategic foresight and cross-border collaboration and peer-learning networks between regions, with a view to encouraging effective decentralised management and implementation of EU funds; underlines that such cooperation across administrative borders can help regions jointly address common development challenges; warns of the risk of yet unspent EU funds being lost, and calls for flexible and preventive mechanisms to safeguard these funds; highlights that cohesion policy outcomes rely on a forward-looking and inclusive strategy, on proper stakeholder involvement and on good governance; |
Amendment 27
Motion for a resolution
Paragraph 15
| Motion for a resolution | Amendment |
| 15. Considers that a new approach to audit and controls should be enshrined in the next cohesion policy, introducing preventive controls executed at the beginning of the budgetary perspective to detect and eliminate the possibility of repeating potential errors in subsequent years of implementation; | 15. Considers that a new approach to audit and controls should be enshrined in the next cohesion policy, introducing preventive controls executed at the beginning of the budgetary perspective to detect and eliminate the possibility of repeating potential errors in subsequent years of implementation; recommends the introduction of a risk-based audit and control approach to reduce unnecessary duplication while maintaining effective financial oversight and fraud prevention; considers that measures should be implemented to reduce duplicate controls and audits for the same project and beneficiary; |
ANNEX: ENTITIES OR PERSONS FROM WHOM THE RAPPORTEUR FOR THE OPINION HAS RECEIVED INPUT
The rapporteur for the opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not receive input from any entity or person to be mentioned in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure
INFORMATION ON ADOPTION BY THE COMMITTEE ASKED FOR OPINION
| Date adopted | 4.6.2025 | |
| Result of final vote | +: –: 0: | 27 3 5 |
| Members present for the final vote | Georgios Aftias, Rasmus Andresen, Isabel Benjumea Benjumea, Tomasz Buczek, Olivier Chastel, Tamás Deutsch, Angéline Furet, Jens Geier, Thomas Geisel, Sandra Gómez López, Andrzej Halicki, Monika Hohlmeier, Janusz Lewandowski, Giuseppe Lupo, Ignazio Roberto Marino, Siegfried Mureşan, Jana Nagyová, Victor Negrescu, Matjaž Nemec, Danuše Nerudová, João Oliveira, Ruggero Razza, Karlo Ressler, Bogdan Rzońca, Julien Sanchez, Hélder Sousa Silva, Nicolae Ştefănuță, Lucia Yar, Auke Zijlstra | |
| Substitutes present for the final vote | Mohammed Chahim, Jonás Fernández, Jussi Saramo | |
| Members under Rule 216(7) present for the final vote | Christine Anderson, Murielle Laurent, Antonio López-Istúriz White |