Skip to content
OPINION (2024/2051(INI))

On a revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world

REGI-AD-770104

Committee on Regional Development · Rapporteur: AdrianDragoş Benea

Official HTML ↗ PDF DOCX
✦ In shortFull textProcedure & committee votes
✦ In short · AI summary of this text, generated 4 Sept 2026

Written by a language model from the full text only; every figure comes from the text. The paragraph links open the paragraph a statement rests on — check the text itself before relying on it.

The Committee on Regional Development's opinion on the revamped long-term budget insists that cohesion policy remains a key pillar, with funding maintained or increased, and opposes centralisation. It calls for the next MFF to support regions, including eastern border and outermost regions, and to address challenges like depopulation, housing, and climate adaptation. It demands simplification, transparency, and flexibility, with cohesion funds kept separate and crisis instruments outside cohesion policy.

Committee position. The Committee on Regional Development proposes amendments to the draft report, insisting on maintaining or increasing cohesion policy funding, opposing centralisation, and calling for simplification and flexibility.

Key points

  1. Insists that the overall volume of the MFF should at least be maintained and that cohesion policy funding should be maintained or increased.
  2. Opposes any top-down centralisation of cohesion policy and rejects RRF-style centralised planning for regional development funding.
  3. Calls for the partnership principle to be fully applied, with mandatory cooperation and consultation of local and regional authorities.
  4. Stresses that regional GDP per capita should remain the main allocation criterion, possibly complemented by other indicators, and co-financing rates set at NUTS 3 level.
  5. Demands increased support for least favoured regions, including rural, eastern border, outermost, and islands, and calls for an Islands Pact.
  6. Calls for enhanced support for SMEs, research and innovation, and infrastructure, including energy, transport, and digital, with attention to cross-border projects.
  7. Highlights the need to address the housing crisis through increased investments in sustainable and energy-efficient housing, and supports the New European Bauhaus.
  8. Calls for a 'cohesion check' of all new EU initiatives and the use of Territorial Impact Assessments to implement the 'do no harm to cohesion' principle.
  9. Demands that cohesion policy funds be kept distinct and independent, with a detailed budget breakdown to ensure transparency and avoid double funding.
  10. Calls for simplification measures, including fewer funds, a single set of rules, and broader use of simplified cost options and financing not linked to costs.
  11. Insists that the next MFF should include only two special instruments for crisis response, outside cohesion policy, and adequately funded from the outset.
  12. Calls for increased funding for border protection and support for regions bordering Ukraine, Belarus, and Russia, and for consolidating border protection funding.

Who is affected

  • Local and regional authorities: must be fully involved in cohesion policy design and implementation, and should have direct access to EU funds.
  • Less developed, rural, outermost, and eastern border regions: targeted for increased support to tackle specific challenges.
  • Small and medium-sized enterprises: should receive enhanced support for economic integration and innovation.
  • Persons with disabilities: EU programmes must guarantee equal opportunities and accessibility.
  • Candidate countries for EU accession: should receive tailored support through additional financial means, not redistribution of existing funds.

Figures and deadlines

  • 29 % of EU citizens live in regions with GDP per capita below 75 % of the EU average; about 135 million people live in places that have fallen behind.
  • Weather- and climate-related extremes caused over EUR 650 billion in economic losses between 1980 and 2022.
  • The annual investment gap is EUR 750-800 billion per year between 2025 and 2030.
  • Additional investment needs to achieve climate neutrality by 2050 are estimated at 1.5 % of GDP per year compared to 2011-2020.
  • The annual repayment cost of the RRF grant component will peak at EUR 26 billion in 2028.
  • Total costs for NGEU capital and interest repayments are projected to be around EUR 20-30 billion a year from 2028.

Legal basis: Chapter 3 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), Article 3 TEU, Articles 174 and 175 TFEU, Article 349 TFEU