The Competitiveness Coordination tool is intended to align EU industrial competitiveness strategy with funding instruments and regulatory frameworks. Member states and EU institutions had expected the instrument to provide guidance on funding allocation and support for strategic sectors, but the latest postponement has pushed back discussions in the Competitiveness Council. Capitals have expressed irritation at the repeated timetable changes, given the pressure to respond quickly to global competition. The delay comes as Europe continues to face high energy costs and persistent supply chain vulnerabilities. These issues have been repeatedly identified by governments and EU officials as structural risks to industrial competitiveness. Several member states have argued that slow progress on new industrial policy tools is undermining the bloc’s ability to respond to challenges posed by the United States and China. Officials involved in preparatory work have pointed to the complexity of designing a tool that balances national priorities, existing EU programmes and single market rules. The coordination mechanism is meant to sit alongside instruments such as InvestEU, cohesion funding and research programmes, with the aim of improving coherence across EU industrial support. Disagreements over scope and governance have contributed to the delay. National governments have privately complained that the lack of clarity on timing and content is complicating domestic planning. Some capitals had expected the tool to provide clearer criteria for identifying strategic projects and to help streamline access to EU funding. Without it, they say, investment decisions in areas such as advanced manufacturing, clean technology and strategic infrastructure are being pushed back. The postponement also highlights broader tensions over the direction of EU industrial policy. While the Commission has advanced initiatives on critical raw materials, economic security and strategic technologies, the missing coordination tool leaves a gap in the policy architecture. Member states remain divided over how far the EU should go in steering industrial investment and coordinating national support schemes. Industry representatives and policy analysts have warned that Europe’s industrial policy agenda risks becoming crowded with overlapping initiatives. In the absence of a clear coordination mechanism, governments and EU institutions are relying on informal processes and existing funds to pursue competitiveness goals. Critics say this increases the risk of duplication and weakens the overall impact of EU support. The delay comes as the EU seeks to strengthen its position in areas such as semiconductors, clean energy and digital technologies. Legislative frameworks like the Chips Act have moved forward, but capitals argue that a broader coordination tool is needed to ensure consistency across sectors and funding streams. Several governments have linked progress on the instrument to wider competitiveness debates at EU level. Member states are now pressing the Commission to provide a revised timetable and clearer commitments on the delayed tool. With economic reviews and competitiveness discussions scheduled later in the year, capitals want reassurance that industrial policy coordination will not slip further down the agenda. EU diplomats say discussions will continue in the coming weeks as pressure mounts to deliver....