European mayors oppose Commission plans to centralise EU funds

Mayors from Romania, Poland and France have warned against potential plans by the European Commission to centralise EU funds, telling Euractiv that they fear being punished for mistakes made by national governments.

A leaked internal document by the European Commission has prompted a strong backlash from representatives of local and regional governments who fear delays and losing their say.

“I was living 23 years in a Communist regime, and I know exactly what it means to be part of a very centralised system of government – a system of centralisation of every decision – and how inefficient it is on the ground,” Emil Boc (PNL, EPP), former prime minister of Romania and mayor of the city of Cluj-Napoca, told Euractiv on Wednesday (9 October).

“I don’t want to bring [that] inefficiency, a bureaucratic state, and the loss of contact with the citizens [...] to the very heart of Europe,” he added.

Boc has led work on building a position within the European Committee of the Regions—which represents local governments in Brussels—on the bloc's cohesion policy in the next seven-year budget period, the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF).

This will start in 2028, but negotiations among co-legislators will begin in 2025 after the EU executive presents its MFF proposals around mid-year.

Around 70% of EU spending, including funds for regional and social development, known as cohesion policy, and payments under the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), are currently under so-called “shared management” between the Commission and national and local governments.

According to the document from the Commission’s budget department (DG BUDG), seen by Euractiv, these funds could be merged into a single fund as part of the 2028-2034 MFF. This would allow member states to draw a “single plan” - giving them the option to shuffle money between the different spending items.

According to the document, this would be complemented by a second major budget item, the European Competitiveness Fund, which includes all funds currently centrally managed by the Commission, as well as a separate item for external spending.

Don’t punish us for national mistakes, mayors decry

Resembling many aspects of the EU's current post-pandemic fund, known as the Recovery and Resilience Facility (RRF), the documents suggest introducing new conditions for the disbursement of EU money, or “payments against the fulfilment of policy objectives” - with such objectives to be managed and tackled by national governments.

“In Poland, we didn’t have access to RRF money for two to three years,” Aleksandra Dulkiewicz (EPP affiliated), mayor of the Polish city of Gdańsk, told Euractiv on the sidelines of the "European Week of Regions and Cities" on Wednesday (9 October).

“Now we are running out of time, and we will not be able to use all the money from the RRF because we are almost three years late,” she added, citing concerns that Polish RRF means cannot be spent in full before the program’s 2026 deadline.

“And it’s not my fault as a mayor,” she added.

RRF funds had been frozen for Poland during the previous national government led by the nationalist Law and Justice Party (PiS, ECR) over rule of law concerns but were approved under the new government.

“We should not punish regions for the mistakes of the national governments,” said Boc, adding that there should be “milestones for the regional level” and “money [given] to them if they achieve the milestone addressed to them, not the national government.”

Tilo Gundlack, a member of the state parliament of the northern German region Mecklenburg-Vorpommern, was also concerned about the implications of the leaked proposals.

“At the moment, we are getting money that we can account for in the [regional] budget,” he told Euractiv.

The new plans, where disbursement would depend on previous achievements, “would be a black box where we don't know exactly what's coming,” he said.

Public perception of EU benefits at stake?

Under the current rules, means under cohesion policy—such as the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) and the European Social Fund (ESF)—are often negotiated directly between regional governments and the European Commission. This is important for regions in federal countries such as Poland, Germany, Belgium, and Romania.

Cohesion policy “is what lets people experience, in a very concrete way, that Europe is something good,” Antje Grotheer (SPD, S&D), head of the regional parliament in the German city-state of Bremen, told Euractiv.

“That makes people identify with Europe in a completely different way than if you say that the EU gives money to the federal government [which] then decides where to spend it,” she added.

Christophe Rouillon (PS, S&D), mayor of the French commune of Coulaines, added that the “force of the process of cohesion policy is to negotiate between the local authorities, the regions and the European Commission to have the best impact at the local ground.”

In contrast, “in France, the [RRF] process was only centralised,” he said, adding that “sometimes the money was used for projects already [planned] and with no added value.”

Rouillon also said that the national government would claim the RRF's successes, such as new industrial sites or energy efficiency measures, for itself instead of presenting them as an EU success.

The management of RRF funds has recently come under scrutiny in Italy, too. Last year, minister for European Affairs and Cohesion Raffaele Fitto—currently nominated to take over the role of Commission executive vice president for cohesion policy—submitted plans for reforming the national programme towards heightened centralisation, prompting widespread criticism at the national level.

Boc, however, was notably optimistic about Fitto's possible new role. “He has a background [at the] local and regional level,” he said about the Italian politician, citing his background as former president of the region of Apulia.

“So I trust that he is going to be the person who will find, as we say in Latin, aurea mediocrity, meaning the golden middle way,” he added.

Transparency note: The author’s trip to the EU’s 22nd “Week of Regions and Cities” is partly funded by the Committee of the Regions and the European Commission.

[Edited by Anna Brunetti/Alice Taylor-Braçe]