European regions and cities are calling on the EU to give millions of displaced Ukrainians legal certainty and a genuine choice between building a future in Europe and returning home safely. Their appeal comes as Russian attacks on Ukraine’s critical energy infrastructure intensify ahead of what is expected to be another harsh winter for the war-torn nation.

Temporary protection for displaced Ukrainians was set to end in March 2028. Eurostat data from July shows that almost 4,5 million non-EU citizens who fled Ukraine were benefiting from the mechanism, which was established shortly after Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022.

“Temporary protection was the right emergency response, but it cannot be the long-term answer,” said Antje Grotheer, Chair of the European Committee of the Regions’ (CoR) Working Group on Ukraine. “People forced to flee Ukraine because of Russia’s war need certainty about their future,” the President of the Bremen State Parliament added.

An opinion drafted by Grotheer and adopted by CoR members on Tuesday calls for timely, accessible information on legal options beyond temporary protection so that people can make informed decisions.

It notes that decisions on legal status are taken mainly at EU and national level, while their practical consequences are managed in cities and regions. Local authorities need predictable funding and administrative capacity to keep public services running and respond to housing pressures, the CoR said.

Grotheer demanded that cities and regions are given a voice in shaping the transition after the EU’s temporary protection runs out.

Preparing for winter

The opinion sets out three parallel priorities: supporting the inclusion of displaced Ukrainians in European communities, investing in their education and skills for the benefit of host societies and Ukraine’s recovery, and enabling voluntary, informed and safe return when conditions allow.

“It’s time now to realise that we should not only treat Ukrainians as vulnerable refugees; we should treat them as our partners,” said Ylva Johansson, EU Special Envoy for Ukrainians in the EU. “Their future is part of Ukraine’s future, and that future is in the European Union,” she added.

“The millions of Ukrainians currently living outside the borders of our country are a huge human potential that Ukraine cannot afford to lose,” said Tetiana Yehorova-Lutsenko, President of the Ukrainian Association of District and Regional Councils (UAROR) and Chair of Kharkiv Regional Council.

The UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) reported that 49 percent of Ukrainian refugees – down from 61 percent in 2024 – have expressed hopes or intentions to return one day, with security, housing and essential services among the key conditions.

Protecting Ukraine’s energy infrastructure has been a central part of the EU’s support since 2022. In a letter to CoR members, President Kata Tüttő and Grotheer warn that the attacks risk depriving communities of basic living conditions. The letter recalls that the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen had described the attacks as “a strategy of terror”.

“Cities and regions must act before the arrival of the cold further aggravates the already difficult humanitarian situation,” the letter warned. It said regions and cities can deliver support in the form of energy equipment, used municipal vehicles, medical supplies or IT equipment.

This story was produced by the European Newsroom (enr) in cooperation with the European Committee of the Regions (CoR). The editorial responsibility lies with the enr. 

Press contact:

Theresa Sostmann
Tel. +32475999415

Theresa.Sostmann@cor.europa.eu

European regional and local leaders have warned that the EU’s next long-term budget risks transferring control over investment programmes to national governments, potentially increasing economic disparities and reducing the ability of poorer regions to shape their own development.

The warning was delivered in Brussels on 12 October by Kata Tüttő, President of the European Committee of the Regions, during the opening of the European Week of Regions and Cities.

Her intervention comes as EU leaders prepare to negotiate the 2028–2034 budget, with disagreements over agricultural funding, regional development, defence, industrial competitiveness and the distribution of financial responsibilities among member states.

The Committee of the Regions warned that greater centralisation could concentrate economic opportunities in already prosperous areas while limiting other territories’ capacity to attract investment and develop essential infrastructure.

The concern goes beyond money allocated to regional development. It addresses who controls spending decisions and whether local authorities retain a meaningful role in determining how European funds are used.

Regional governments resist centralisation

EU cohesion policy has traditionally sought to reduce disparities between richer and poorer regions through investment in transport, infrastructure, education, business development and public services. While national governments administer considerable funds, regional and local authorities are frequently involved in identifying priorities and delivering projects.

The Committee argues that restructuring which concentrates decision-making at national level could weaken this arrangement. National governments may favour country-wide industrial or infrastructure programmes, while regional authorities identify specific problems arising from local conditions.

A national infrastructure strategy could prioritise major transport routes and industrial centres. Regional administrations might instead emphasise connecting smaller communities, maintaining local services or developing specialised economic activities.

The dispute concerns whether the next EU budget will maintain flexibility for regional priorities. In Belgium, Germany, Spain and Italy, regional institutions possess important responsibilities across economic development, education and infrastructure. Changes to EU spending governance could alter established relations between European, national and regional institutions.

The budget negotiations intensify the dispute

Ireland’s rotating Council presidency has proposed reducing the Commission’s original seven-year budget plans by approximately €141 billion while largely protecting agriculture and cohesion compared with other expenditure categories.

The proposed financial framework would nevertheless remain substantially larger than the current budget. The distribution of resources remains contentious, and an overall cut does not necessarily translate into the same reduction for every region.

Effects will depend on allocation formulas, national spending plans and programme governance. Meanwhile, European institutions face demands for stronger investment in defence production, digital infrastructure, competitiveness and support for Ukraine while maintaining agricultural and regional commitments.

Economic disparities remain a European problem

The Committee presented its seventh annual assessment of Europe’s regions and cities during the European Week of Regions and Cities, held in Brussels from 12 to 14 October.

The assessment examines competitiveness, resilience, public services, democratic governance and financial conditions. Regional disparities remain a significant feature of the EU economy despite decades of common investment programmes.

Large metropolitan areas often benefit from concentrations of universities, research institutions, advanced industries and capital. Less densely populated territories may struggle with demographic decline, shortages of skilled workers and the cost of maintaining infrastructure.

These differences can reinforce themselves over time. Businesses invest where suitable workers, transport networks and customers are already concentrated. Younger workers moving towards metropolitan economies may further reduce the economic prospects of communities they leave behind.

Defence spending creates new pressures

The increase in European defence expenditure introduces another dimension. Regions containing defence manufacturers, engineering firms, research institutions and military installations could benefit substantially from new spending, while others may receive little direct economic advantage.

If industrial investment concentrates in already advanced manufacturing centres, geographical disparities could widen. Conversely, procurement programmes and infrastructure investment could bring opportunities to weaker regional economies with suitable facilities and labour.

A question of political authority

The Committee of the Regions has limited formal authority over the EU’s long-term budget. National governments will negotiate the framework, and the European Parliament must consent to the final agreement.

Regional leaders are seeking to influence those negotiations before political compromises are established. Their central argument is that aggregate European economic growth alone does not capture the distribution of investment, employment and public services across the Union.

The approaching European Council negotiations will indicate whether governments intend to preserve regional influence over EU spending or concentrate greater authority over investment decisions at national level.