With the support of the European Parliament, the EC could propose amending the Recovery and Resilience Facility Regulation

The European Parliament adopted a resolution in Strasbourg that includes a proposal to extend the financing of the recovery and resilience mechanism to allow for the completion of ongoing projects, a document that highlights the stabilizing effect of this instrument in the context of economic uncertainty in Europe. MEPs express concern that the short time frame for implementing the remaining funding from the recovery and resilience mechanism poses significant challenges, such as key reforms, investments, and the 70% of milestones and targets that have not yet been achieved. MEPs are calling for an 18-month extension to apply to projects that are on track to be successfully completed but still need more time. MEP Victor Negrescu, one of the initiators of the resolution, is the guest on “Morning Call”. Good morning!

Good morning and thank you for the invitation!

What does the list of requests approved by the European Parliament actually include?

It is an extremely important report. It refers to the implementation of the recovery and resilience mechanism and presents a series of solutions that the European Union must implement in the near future. On the one hand, we have this 18-month extension of the recovery and resilience mechanism for mature projects, as you said, those projects that can be completed within this extension period, and here we are talking about hospitals, motorways, about schools that need a few extra months to be completed with funding from this European program. A second provision that is extremely relevant and useful for Romania in particular refers to the possibility that those projects that cannot be completed through the recovery and resilience mechanism within the timeframe available to us could be transferred to other European programs, meaning that if we have a project that is not completed by the end of August 2026, we can switch to European funding that comes from the cohesion policy or the future competitiveness fund, or from the funds available through the European Investment Bank, the InvestEU program. The third provision that greatly helps Romania refers to simplifying the changes made to the Recovery and Resilience Plan. Romania is currently in the middle of a process of renegotiating the plan, and this call by the European Parliament for simplification may help the future government to modify those projects or even reforms that are difficult to achieve, and includes rather tangible targets because, as you rightly said earlier, unfortunately, at European level, only 30% of the targets and milestones set have been achieved so far, and I am referring here to all Member States, not just Romania.

We were saying that the European Parliament is now offering broad support for saving the projects in the NRRP that are considered mature, including the possibility of financing the unfinished ones through other European funds, but what next?

There will be extensive discussions between European institutions to implement these recommendations from the European Parliament, because our report was passed by a large majority in the European legislature, a large majority that confirms that these discussions must begin. In fact, although I could say that the European Commission was initially resistant to certain proposals, it has already begun to take up some of our proposals. I am referring here to the transfer of projects to other European programs. Initially, the European Commission did not want to make this change, but it has already issued a communication that takes up this recommendation that we made in the report we coordinated. Also, when we talk about simplifying the amendment procedures, there are all kinds of solutions that Romania has at its disposal and which it recommends to the national authorities, namely that we could take some of the money, create certain funds, keep the money so that it can be used after the August 2026 deadline, we can also combine resources from the NRRP with other European programs, for example with the defense sector, so there are solutions available to Romania. In the coming period, we need people who are very knowledgeable about European projects, because Romania desperately needs European funds to get out of this deficit situation. Through our report, we have offered, I would say, a breath of fresh air for the member states, for Romania. We must take advantage of this context and at the same time intensify our efforts to implement the NRRP, because, at the end of the day, Bucharest must make these efforts and, in this sense, obviously, those involved must get down to work. There are objectives where, unfortunately, we have real difficulties, in the area of the environment, I would emphasize, in the area of energy, and it is there where we must do much more than we have done so far.

But procedurally, what are the next steps?

Procedurally, the European Commission takes note of this vote by the European Parliament, the European executive must come up with a response, as it has in fact done now with a communication in which it took up the points I highlighted earlier, and the European Commission, in terms of extending the deadline, should propose to the Member States that they amend the Regulation on the Recovery and Resilience Facility. In this sense, both the European Commission and the Member States, and here is a role that Romania must also play, must begin this negotiation process, because the agreement of all Member States is needed. There are many countries in this situation, which is why I am, I would say, quite confident that we can have this discussion and reach such a decision. The future Minister for European Projects, the future Minister of Foreign Affairs of Romania, together with the President of Romania, should, I believe, be directly involved in collaborating with Member States and convincing them in this direction, because it is clearly in our interest. Otherwise, we will be far from our goal of accessing all these funds, which come, for the most part, in the form of grants for Romania, i.e., relatively free money, and in this context, Romania must have a strategy to convince its European partners, and we too have the opportunity to do so. Negotiations on the long-term European budget are beginning, and we could, in these negotiations, insist on this extension, because, to give you a few examples, for the road infrastructure sector, two or three extra months means completed motorways, six extra months means certain hospitals being 100% equipped, because there are sometimes delays caused by a lack of suppliers, or delays caused by weather conditions, and in this sense, obviously, every extra month is useful to Romania. This financial solution, this mechanism, is unique to Europe. It is a historic mechanism, created specifically for the economic recovery of Member States after the pandemic, so this train of European money, these types of funds, will not come again. Therefore, it is useful for us to access them in their entirety, and I believe it is also useful for the European Commission, because we have a President of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, who has supported this project and who I believe has an interest in ensuring that the program is used effectively. I must say that there are also some resistant voices, those states that are rather reluctant to accept this European funding, which may contribute more to the EU budget, are cautious about extending the implementation period, but we always manage to convince them, so it is important to start this negotiation process and achieve this goal, which has been clearly and firmly requested by the European Parliament.

And personally, at the end of this whole process with major implications for Romania, are you optimistic?

I believe we can do this because, over time, we have seen here in Brussels how certain things were rejected and then happened anyway. Let me give you two examples. I am the one who revised the NRRP regulation, the Recovery and Resilience Facility, which allowed Member States to modify their plans in relation to the impact of the war in Ukraine. When I came up with this proposal, the European Commission, the Member States, my fellow MEPs, many of them told me it was impossible, that I would not be able to do it. I submitted the amendment, I negotiated, it was possible, and this provision was introduced. Obviously, many people took credit for it afterwards, but we managed to go against the tide. The same thing happened with the transfer of projects. Initially, they said no, we have a deadline of August 2026, the projects will not be completed, the funding will stop. And suddenly, the European Commission took up my idea and now they are managing to make this transfer and are coming up with regulations to explain how this process will be carried out. So, in terms of the extension, I believe we can obtain at least a technical extension of a few months, until the end of 2026. This technical extension does not require extensive changes to the regulation, but we insist on changing the regulation, we insist on the 18 months. I would like to remind you that almost all the pro-European police groups supported this madness, that we had almost 70% of the European Parliament supporting this report, everyone knew the details of this report. Obviously, the pro-European majority in the European Parliament also translates into a pro-European majority in the Council, and I hope that this will manifest itself and that we will have a decision on the extension by the end of the year at the latest.

Thank you for all these clarifications. The guest on “Morning Call” was MEP Victor Negrescu.

Translated by: Radu Matei