The European Parliament's Regional Development (REGI) committee on 2 June 2026 debated the draft opinion on the budget expenditure tracking and performance framework regulation, with 690 amendments tabled. The debate revealed divergences over simplification, horizontal principles, and the balance between cohesion policy's traditional focus and new performance requirements.
Budget co-rapporteur Jean-Marc Germain (S&D) outlined a delayed timetable — draft report on 7 September, plenary vote in October or November — to incorporate committee inputs, stressing multilevel governance and performance indicators suited to diverse regions. REGI rapporteur Raquel García Hermida-Van Der Walle (Renew) prioritised simplicity for beneficiaries, meaningful horizontal principles (gender, climate, do-no-significant-harm or DNSH), and synergy between cohesion and competitiveness.
EPP shadow Isabel Le Callennec criticised the European Commission for undermining cohesion policy's DNA, warning that horizontal priorities and Annex 1 increase complexity and risk excluding projects. She called for stronger regional roles and specific provisions for outermost regions. S&D's Andi Cristea backed an efficient framework but opposed amendments weakening DNSH or adding red tape. Klara Dostalova (PfE) demanded subsidiarity, lighter rules for SMEs and local authorities, and reduced bureaucracy. Greens-EFA's V. Prebilič welcomed the rapporteur's approach but flagged concerns over DNSH's disappearance and urged transparency via the single gateway and a rural focus.
Commission representative Máté Tas defended the regulation as simplification, noting continuity with cohesion rules and that DNSH obligations stem from the Financial Regulation, with guidance to clarify compliance without extra burdens. García Hermida countered that simplification benefits member states more than final beneficiaries, a point the committee aims to correct. The opinion will be adopted on 1 September.
Regional and local authorities face potential complexity from horizontal principles and Annex 1, which could exclude projects if not carefully designed. SMEs and final beneficiaries may benefit from lighter rules advocated by PfE and Renew, but risk administrative burden if multiple reporting requirements remain. Managing authorities could see streamlined procedures if the Commission's simplification vision prevails, but may struggle with new performance indicators. The debate highlights a trade-off between EU-level policy goals (gender, climate) and local flexibility, with moderate impact on all parties depending on the final compromise.