Cohesion policy, the poor relation of the Swedish Presidency of the EU Council? Frustration was palpable on Wednesday 25 January in the Committee on Regional Development (REGI) when Swedish Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren presented the Presidency’s priorities.
“It is regrettable that cohesion policy is not mentioned at all [...] in [your] priorities”, said Younous Omarjee (The Left, French) by way of opening.
The Minister’s speech did little more to convince. After elaborating on the four main priorities of the Presidency (security, competitiveness, energy and fundamental values), he announced EU Council Conclusions on the challenges facing macro-regional strategies (see EUROPE 13100/9) for June. This was followed by some vague promises on the follow-up to the European Commission’s Communication on the development of talent in the EU regions (see EUROPE 13101/15) and the implementation of the 2021-2027 cohesion programmes.
“I thought I was coming to the REGI meeting, but maybe I’ve got it wrong”, replied Marcos Ros Sempere (S&D, Spanish), asking him to elaborate on his ideas on post-2027 cohesion policy, its flexibilisation and the difficulties of absorbing funds.
Susana Solís Pérez (Renew Europe, Spanish) continued along those lines and asked Mr Kullgren about the synergies between cohesion funds and other funds, the financing of the “European Sovereignty Fund” (see EUROPE 13106/7), as well as the implementation of REPowerEU and SAFE. On this last point, the Minister said that it would be “on the table at the February Council meeting, with the intention to adopting it”.
As for the blockage of the European Cross-Border Mechanism (ECBM) Regulation in the EU Council (see EUROPE 13022/5), mentioned by Martina Michels (The Left, German), Mr Kullgren conceded that “there is not much of an appetite in the Council for moving forward on that front”.
Finally, asked about his vision of cohesion policy, notably by Niklas Nienass (Greens/EFA, German), the Minister assured that it should remain “a long-term policy, that promotes harmonious development across the Union”.
Only Krzysztof Hetman (EPP, Polish) was more lenient, welcoming the focus on the consequences of the war in Ukraine. His question on how to assist Ukrainian local governments, “apart from giving more money”, remained unanswered. The same fate was reserved for the demands on rural areas, put forward, among others, by Domenico Nesci (ECR, Italian).
The Minister, failing to answer all the questions, defended himself by maintaining that “cohesion policy contributes to all the Swedish Presidency priorities” and by insisting on the need to “set priorities”.
Mr Omarjee concluded the meeting by saying that it was “not too late to send positive signals” and that his committee would be up for “an informal cohesion summit”, which is currently not on the Stockholm agenda. (Original version in French by Hélène Seynaeve)