A new EU cohesion policy will be born on 1 January 2014. So the next four years promise intense debates, among other issues, on the measures the EU will implement for its regions, how funds are to be spent - €347 billion for 2007-2013 - the beneficiary regions, the functioning of the structural funds and the future of territorial cooperation.

The debate is already under way. In recent months, both the European Commission and the EP political groups have published different documents and analyses. Parliament proposed to study the feasibility of merging the different funds (European Regional Development Fund, Social Fund, Cohesion Fund and European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development), which would be a first for cohesion policy.

Obviously, though, it will fall to the newly-elected EP to set the tone. It will have a huge responsibility because Parliament’s close involvement in this highly political matter will be even greater in the future. If the Lisbon Treaty enters into force, co-decision will be the rule on cohesion policy. Parliament will thus bring all its weight to bear on adoption of cohesion policy rules. Until now, the general structural fund regulation – the basic text setting out the rules – has been adopted under the assent procedure, giving MEPs the choice of accepting or rejecting, but not amending the text. This did not prevent Parliament from holding consultations with the Council of Ministers, but it is clear that the new procedure will give another dimension to negotiations between the two. Who knows what cohesion policy might have been like today had Parliament been given a similar role in 2006 when the structural fund regulations were adopted? On a number of points, it proved to be an objective ally – admittedly a lightweight – for the European Commission, introducing innovations that ended up being nixed by the Council (such as the idea of a reserve of EU funds to reward outstanding programmes, and the reallocation of unspent funds to the regional policy budget not the EU general budget). This time around, the Council will have to reckon with Parliament and its Regional Development Committee, which in the past was forced into discretion since it was confined to issuing own-initiative reports.