From 2014 till 2020, the European Union (EU) will be entering a new programming period. This transition entails the introduction and subsequent replacement of the EU’s various funding programmes. The introduction of a Union-wide shift is bound to have a significant and visible impact especially on those Member States that have joined the Union within the last decade.   There is no doubt that, as the changeover date starts to edge closer, the issue is bound to continue attracting increased media attention.  Below, one will find some of the recurring questions regarding this change over, as well as an explanation that should help clarify what the process entails.   What exactly is a Programming Period.?   In the same way that Malta has an annual budget every November that determines where Government will be directing and dedicating its financial resources, every seven years the EU conducts a similar exercise. An evaluation of sorts is carried out on all its funding mechanisms. Lessons learnt from the performance of funds over the previous programming period are gathered, and changes introduced on both how these funds are administered as well as the priorities towards which these funds are dedicated to. What is important is that one keeps in mind that the proposed changes are being implemented with the intent of both directing the EU’s funds towards those areas that are most in need, and attempting to do so in a simpler, more affective and transparent way. The changes are selected through both a detailed analyses of the experiences countries have had with these funds as well as negotiations with the member states themselves until a package is determined that is both according to the EU’s regional policy and the individual country’s expectations.       How significant will the changes be?   When one considers that this is a change that happens once every seven years one cannot assume that changes will be minimal or negligible. This is indeed an important opportunity where issues that may have been problematic for programme countries may be discussed and solutions identified.  Member states may then negotiate for the introduction of these changes within the next programming period. The transition between one programming period and another is a rare window of opportunity that is intended to bring about change. Furthermore, the affects span beyond the EU countries, since even neighbouring countries benefiting from EU funding will be affected. Access to funding programmes is in fact one of the bargaining chips the EU uses in conducting relations with non-Member States. One point worth mentioning is that when the recession started in Europe in 2008 the priorities for the current 7 years had already been established. The coming programming period may very well have an opportunity to specifically address some of the issues brought about by this phenomenon and assist in overcoming Europe’s financial situation.   How will Malta be affected?   At the moment, the biggest concern locally is the country’s possible transition from being an objective one region to an objective two region. What this means in simpler terms is the following - at the moment Malta and Gozo are in their entirety within that category of regions that are allowed the maximum level of benefits through Structural and Cohesion Funds.   Structural and cohesion funds, are the tools used for financing large scale projects, in fact 35% of the EU’s entire budget is dedicated to this purpose. In order to illustrate what these funds are used for, as a rule of thumb it is pretty safe to assume that any project having a billboard stating it is being funded in part by EU funds, is being financed through the use of these funds. Moving from Objective One to Objective Two does not mean that the EU will stop financing such projects, but rather that the rules and the financial allocations given to such project, as well as the nature of the projects themselves are likely to shift.    Apart from projects of an infrastructural nature what else may be affected?   The introduction of a new programming period will be affecting changes across the board; this also includes the EU’s funding programmes dedicated towards youths, education, media, culture etc… There is however an important distinction in this regard between Structural and Cohesion Funds and funds dedicated to projects of a non-infrastructural nature. In that, while the priorities of infrastructure projects are determined on a region by region bases, other measures will have uniform regulations across the Union. These will have to be decided multilaterally between all the Member States of the EU.  The guiding values behind the changes being proposed are however still similar in scope, that is; the increased simplification of regulatory procedures in order to make the EU’s financial resources more accessible for and to the benefit of its citizens.   In spite of the EU approaching its sixth decade, in comparative terms the Union as a system of governance may still be considered as being in its adolescence. These processes of self-examination and auto-correction serve as a means of further contributing to the advancement of both the Union as a whole as well as the administrative methods utilised in carrying out its functions. Although change may at times be a daunting affair, it is a necessary exercise to ensure that the principles of good governance are adhered to and always remain at the service of the public they are representing.      Albert Delia Executive, EU Funding, MEUSAC