Three right-wing political groups in the European Parliament are pushing for a second establishment of an investigative inquiry committee regarding the financing of NGOs by the European Commission. This follows allegations from Transparency International that an orchestrated smear campaign against civil society is occurring, leading to a formal complaint about unauthorized leaks. A recent report from German newspaper Welt Am Sonntag indicated that the EU allegedly funneled up to €700,000 to environmental NGOs to promote its climate policies. Although the Commission has denied these allegations, asserting transparency in its funding processes, calls for scrutiny from right-wing MEPs have intensified, labeling the situation a “Green Gate” scandal.
Carlo Fidanza, a member of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), emphasized the urgency for an inquiry committee, a sentiment echoed by 200 MEPs from various political families. He argues that the latest revelations demand a closer examination of the ties between the European Commission and environmental NGOs. Hungarian MEP Csaba Dömötör also reiterated the need for transparency in NGO contracts, suggesting that taxpayer money may be supporting ideologically driven agendas, diverging from the democratic values expected of member states. To this end, the Fidesz representatives intend to pursue targeted information requests concerning these lobbying contracts.
The claims regarding the misuse of EU funds for NGOs were initially reported in February. In April, several right-wing amendments aimed at addressing the EU-NGO funding framework were voted down by a parliamentary committee, which included efforts to condemn what some termed an “enormous EU-NGO propaganda complex.” The committee rejected demands for a probe by the European Court of Auditors (ECA) into the EU’s LIFE Programme, which finances environmental initiatives in part via grants for NGOs. The upcoming decision by the Conference of Presidents regarding the establishment of the inquiry committee is critical, with support from the Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations groups, indicating a broader right-wing alignment on this issue.
Transparency International’s EU director, Nick Aiossa, has contested the credibility of the allegations surrounding NGOs engaged in shadow-lobbying for the Commission, labeling these narratives as debunked and politically motivated. He advocates for civil society’s role in public discourse and contends that existing transparency measures are effective. The organization previously opposed the formation of an inquiry committee, characterizing the sustained political attacks on NGOs as tactical efforts aimed at discrediting them and undermining their funding. Aiossa warns that a small group of right-wing MEPs is responsible for leaking confidential documents for smear tactics against NGOs.
At the core of the recent controversy are LIFE operating grants, part of the larger EU LIFE program, which is designed to fund environmental projects through open calls and strict eligibility criteria. Environmental NGOs can secure substantial financial support, with individual organizations potentially receiving up to €700,000 annually. The evaluations for grant awarding are conducted not by the Commission but by agencies like the European Climate, Infrastructure and Environment Executive Agency (CINEA). Importantly, while advocacy through lobbying is permitted, it is not enforced or directed under grant agreements, allowing NGOs autonomy over their funding and operations.
Despite previous critiques regarding the transparency of this funding process, as highlighted in a recent report by the European Court of Auditors, the Commission has begun enhancing risk-based verification processes. While these reforms aim to strengthen oversight, concerns about potential misuse of EU funds remain. To address transparency issues, the Commission has instituted new guidelines to ensure that EU funding is not used for direct lobbying of EU institutions, reaffirming that grants should reflect the independent views of the NGOs rather than the Commission’s interests. As debates continue in Parliament, the dynamics surrounding NGO financing, public accountability, and transparency in the EU remain critical areas of scrutiny.
