Text · Opinion parliamentary committee draft
On discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2024: Section III – Commission
Document REGI-PA-779625 · 2025/2145(DEC)
- Kind
- Opinion parliamentary committee draft REGI-PA-779625
- Date
- 12 November 2025
- Committee
- Committee on Regional Development
- Rapporteur
- Gabriella Gerzsenyi
- Dossier
- 2025/2145(DEC)
More facts (3)
- Formats
- Official page PDF Word
- Subject matter
- BUDG
- Reference
- 2025/2145(DEC)
In short
A summary of the text written by AI; ¶ opens the paragraph it rests on.
AI: In short Written by AI from the official text — check the source · deepseek-v4-flash · 4 Sept 2026
The Committee on Regional Development's draft opinion on the 2024 budget discharge for the Commission notes a 5.7% error rate in cohesion spending, calls for simplification, and rejects proposed changes to cohesion policy for 2028-2034.
Position. The Committee on Regional Development proposes that the Committee on Budgetary Control incorporate these suggestions into its motion for a resolution, including noting error rates, calling for simplification, and rejecting proposed budget changes.
Key points
- Notes the estimated error level in cohesion spending is 5.7%, down from 9.3% in 2023, and that the Commission estimates risk at payment at 2.9%, but acknowledges methodologies differ and are not directly comparable.
- Reiterates calls for further simplification of cohesion rules to reduce errors and ease access to funding, with partnership, shared management, and decentralisation at the heart.
- Highlights the importance of STEP and RESTORE amendments but warns that constant amendments create legal uncertainty and undermine long-term cohesion objectives.
- Highlights the role of OLAF and EPPO in protecting EU financial interests and calls for sufficient resources for these bodies.
- Rejects the proposed 2028-2034 budget model with 27 separate plans and cash for reforms, and rejects merging cohesion, agricultural, and fisheries funds.
- Firmly rejects any nationalisation of cohesion policy planning and stresses that local and regional authorities must be mandatorily involved in design and implementation.
Who is affected
- Local and regional authorities: their involvement in cohesion policy design and implementation should be mandatory.
- Beneficiaries of cohesion funding: simplification would ease their access to funding.
- OLAF and EPPO: need sufficient resources to protect EU financial interests.
Figures and deadlines
Text
The text as parsed from the official Word file. Every paragraph has a link (¶) and can be saved to a project as a passage.
Opinion
The Committee on Regional Development calls on the Committee on Budgetary Control, as the committee responsible, to incorporate the following suggestions into its motion for a resolution:
1. Notes that, according to the Court of Auditors annual report for 2024, the estimated level of error in spending in the area of ‘Cohesion, resilience and values’ amounts to 5,7 %, down from 9.3 % in 2023; notes that the Commission estimates the risk at payment for this spending area at 2.9 %; acknowledges the different methodologies of each of the institutions and the conclusion of a recent study that the error rate and risk at payment are not directly comparable; notes that both institutions agree that spending in this area is materially affected by errors;
2. Notes that both the Commission and the Court of Auditors have repeatedly stated that the complexity of the rules governing cohesion policy is responsible for a large share of the errors in this spending area; reiterates its previous calls for further simplification, which would reduce the risk of errors and, at the same time, ease beneficiaries’ access to funding; reiterates that the partnership principle, shared management and decentralisation must be at the heart of any future simplification of the policy;
3. Recalls that in 2024, several amendments to the cohesion policy framework, namely STEP and RESTORE, entered into force; highlights the importance of these instruments to enhance EU competitiveness and addressing the consequences of natural disasters; reiterates, nevertheless, that constant amendments to the cohesion policy framework lead to legal uncertainty and instability, and could undermine the long-term structural cohesion objectives of reducing disparities across the EU;
4. Highlights the role of the European Anti-Fraud Office and the European Public Prosecutor’s Office in protecting the financial interests of the Union and defending the rule of law; reiterates the need to provide these EU bodies with sufficient resources.
5. Is deeply concerned about the current EU budget proposals for 2028-2034, which intend to deliver cohesion policy through 27 separate national and regional plans and to apply a cash for reforms approach; rejects the proposed merging of cohesion, agricultural and fisheries funds, as it would put in a direct competition both local and regional authorities and all the sectoral policies covered by the fund; firmly rejects any attempt to nationalise cohesion policy planning; is concerned about the impact of the proposed model on the placed-based approach and multilevel governance of cohesion policy; stresses that the involvement of local and regional authorities in the design and implementation of cohesion policy should be mandatory.
Back matter, 1
Parts that accompany the text rather than belong to it: explanatory statement, annexes, opinions appended by other committees. Collapsed.
Annex: declaration of input 1 block
The rapporteur for opinion declares under her exclusive responsibility that she did not include in her opinion input from interest representatives falling within the scope of the Interinstitutional Agreement on a mandatory transparency register, or from representatives of public authorities of third countries, including their diplomatic missions and embassies, to be listed in this Annex pursuant to Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure.
Connections
The dossier, the decisions on this text and its other versions.
No connections found for this item.
Sources & citation
Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.
- Data source
- Licensed CC BY 4.0.
- Retrieved
- 25 September 2026
Cite as
European Parliament (2025). “DRAFT OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2024: Section III – Commission”. Text, 12 November 2025. docId REGI-PA-779625. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/REGI-PA-779625 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Data: EP Open Data API: document record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/documents/REGI-PA-779625 (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX
@misc{epw-text-regi-pa-779625,
author = {{European Parliament}},
title = {{DRAFT OPINION on discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2024: Section III – Commission}},
year = {2025},
date = {2025-11-12},
howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/REGI-PA-779625}},
url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/texts/REGI-PA-779625},
urldate = {2026-09-25},
publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
note = {Text. docId REGI-PA-779625. Data: EP Open Data API: document record (CC BY 4.0)}
}