Topical Information

The European Parliament (EP) Office in Bulgaria and the National Association of Municipalities in the Republic of Bulgaria (NAMRB) held a discussion on the topic “The Future of Cohesion Policy: European Plans and Bulgarian Priorities.” The event took place at the House of Europe in Sofia.

Participants in the forum included Silvia Georgieva, Executive Director of NAMRB; Tsvetelina Penkova, Member of the European Parliament (S&D); Anton Gladnishki, Head of the “Reforms and Just Transition” Department at the Central Coordination Unit of the Council of Ministers; Ivaylo Stoyanov, Head of the “Strategic Planning and Programming” Department at the Ministry of Regional Development and Public Works (MRDPW); and Zornitsa Rusinova, Chair of the Economic and Social Council.

The forum was opened by the Head of the EP Office in Bulgaria, Teodor Stoychev, who emphasized the significance of the ongoing process to prepare the EU’s new seven-year financial framework. “When we talk about regional policy, the role of local and regional authorities is extremely important,” he said, thanking NAMRB for its partnership.

Silvia Georgieva highlighted the importance of discussions regarding the new annual financial framework proposed by the European Commission in the summer. She described the meeting as one of the first on this topic and noted the challenges facing local authorities: “We understand that the debate on this year’s financial framework is starting slowly because we are too busy putting out daily fires.”

Nevertheless, Georgieva stressed that local self-government “is not exempt from the obligation to understand what the European Union intends to convey with the new financial framework.” The changes foresee a significant centralization of fund management in the hands of national governments over the next seven years. “We were surprised by the Commission’s innovative approach, proposing this highly centralized method for distributing the European budget for the next seven years,” she stated.

Georgieva emphasized the risks of this new distribution of power: “With this package of decisions, things are left in the hands of central governments, and if they fail to implement the reforms required by the Commission, investments in the regions directly depend on their incapacity.” She also recalled the position of the Committee of the Regions, which states that local and regional authorities should not be made dependent on the weaknesses of national governments. Additional concern comes from administrative challenges in the new period: “We are also concerned about complex administration because we do not have regional operational programs or a second level of self-government to assume political responsibility for the allocation of funds.”

According to Georgieva, the upcoming months will be extremely demanding and difficult for administrations, and “technical assistance is crucial for implementing this new complex financial framework” so that municipalities can meet the EU’s high requirements.

MEP Tsvetelina Penkova pointed out that the current financial framework allocates funds based on expenditures and operational programs. “Now a new model of money-for-reforms is required,” she emphasized. According to her, spending through national plans has revealed shortcomings: “On average, only about 55% of EU Recovery and Resilience Facility funds actually reach the economies, regions, and citizens. This is unsatisfactory and demonstrates the need for more effective investments.”

Penkova also expressed concern about the proposal to combine approximately €850 billion for the Common Agricultural Policy and cohesion policy into a single fund. “This raises questions about how these key programs will maintain their identity and how the funds will be allocated,” she added.

She further noted that European institutions will decide whether member states implement their reforms, placing countries in strong dependence on centralized control.

Anton Gladnishki from the Council of Ministers’ Administration warned that merging multiple policies into a “mega strategic document” has benefits in terms of synergy but also serious risks:
“Mechanical consolidation leads to a loss of identity for both cohesion policy and the Common Agricultural Policy. Implementing the money-for-reforms model resembles the Recovery and Resilience Plan: if a country does not achieve its targets, it does not receive funding.”

Ivaylo Stoyanov from MRDPW also described the new mechanism as a challenge. He added that many municipalities in Europe express dissatisfaction because urban policy is not sufficiently represented in the new proposals. “However, we also see positive aspects, such as the continuation of integrated territorial investments,” Stoyanov noted.

Zornitsa Rusinova explained that some details of the European Commission’s proposals pose challenges for Bulgaria, which relies heavily on funds for reforms in the economic and social spheres. “We are concerned that the Commission is beginning to shift the general principle of shared management,” she added.

The discussion also allowed for comments from Sofia’s Deputy Mayor Ivan Goichev, who noted that concerns about excessive centralization are shared by many European cities. “The question arises whether the goal is stronger cities or stronger central governments.”

The forum concluded with the participants agreeing that this is only the beginning of the discussions and that further meetings and debates will be held to ensure effective participation of local and regional authorities in shaping the EU’s new financial framework.