{"id":119236,"date":"2025-11-26T08:09:24","date_gmt":"2025-11-26T07:09:24","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/eeb.org\/?p=119236"},"modified":"2025-11-26T08:15:00","modified_gmt":"2025-11-26T07:15:00","slug":"environmental-groups-warn-of-biased-probe-as-right-wing-meps-launch-working-group-to-scrutinise-eu-funding-for-ngos-boycotted-by-other-parties","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/eeb.org\/fr\/environmental-groups-warn-of-biased-probe-as-right-wing-meps-launch-working-group-to-scrutinise-eu-funding-for-ngos-boycotted-by-other-parties\/","title":{"rendered":"Environmental groups warn of biased probe as right-wing MEPs launch working group to scrutinise EU funding for NGOs – boycotted by other parties"},"content":{"rendered":"
Brussels, 24 November 2025<\/strong>\u00a0<\/span>\u2013 Ahead of the inaugural meeting of the European Parliament\u2019s new scrutiny working group (SWG) on EU funding for NGOs on 26 November, environmental organisations are raising strong concerns about the group\u2019s mandate, scope and intention. They criticise its narrow focus on NGOs, the politicised nature of its composition, and its creation in the first place, noting that robust procedures for scrutinising EU funds for environmental NGOs, the target of the inaugural meeting, already exist.<\/div>\n
\n
\u201cThis working group is unnecessary and infringes on the existing procedures. It is biased from the start \u2013 a political theatre designed to undermine NGOs’ credibility and legitimacy. The group’s proponents, notably conservative and right-wing MEPs, have repeatedly shown their hostility towards civil society and have consistently voted against stronger EU-level transparency rules. As such, the work of this group will only serve to further institutionalise attacks on NGOs and amplify disinformation,<\/i>\u201d said a spokesperson on behalf of all signatories.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n
\n

Environmental citizens organisations fully support (and practice) robust transparency and accountability for all EU spending. However, they warn that the selective scope of the SWG \u2013 focusing solely on NGOs rather than conducting a comprehensive assessment of all EU fund beneficiaries, including corporate actors, consultancies, and other tenders \u2013 risks creating a distorted and misleading picture of EU funding for public interest advocacy.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Public funding for civil society is essential to a functioning democracy. It enables organisations to provide independent expertise, support communities, bring citizens into decision-making, monitor the implementation of EU laws and hold governments and corporations to account. Without predictable and transparent public funding, watchdogs weaken, participation shrinks, and policymaking becomes more vulnerable to unchecked influence.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Concerns are further heightened by the composition of the working group, which is made up mainly of conservative and right-wing MEPs. Most other political groups at the centre and left have reportedly chosen to boycott the group. This echoes the earlier vote by the Socialists & Democrats, Renew Europe, the Greens and the Left against establishing the SWG in the first place, arguing that participating would legitimise a process designed to single out NGOs rather than scrutinise all beneficiaries of EU funds.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

They also warned that the mandate duplicates \u2013 and potentially undermines \u2013 existing oversight mechanisms. NGOs say this absence of political balance is a direct consequence of the group\u2019s narrow and contentious design, resulting in a politically driven targeting of civil society rather than a genuine effort to strengthen transparency across all EU funding.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Over the past year, several members of the European People\u2019s Party and far-right groups have repeatedly targeted NGOs, fuelling an atmosphere of unjustified suspicion towards civil society actors. These attacks persist despite the absence of any evidence of wrongdoing \u2013 and despite the well-documented outsized influence of vested-interest lobbying over the public interest.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

A thorough discharge procedure from the Parliament\u2019s Budgetary Control Committee, as well as a recent report by the European Court of Auditors, found no evidence of any misuse of EU funds, financial irregularities, breach of rules or maladministration. EU funding programmes, including LIFE, already have robust monitoring and audit systems that apply equally to all beneficiaries.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

These attacks on NGO funding form part of a wider erosion of civic space across Europe. Civil society organisations increasingly face \u2018foreign agent\u2019 narratives, administrative choke points, SLAPPs and chronic resource pressure. Patterns once associated with governments outside Europe\u2019s democratic community are now emerging within it, threatening public-interest advocacy, democratic participation and free speech.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

Environmental organisations remain fully committed to transparency, public scrutiny and responsible use of EU funds. They will continue to provide factual information and evidence of the essential role civil society plays in supporting the implementation of EU environmental law, delivering on the European Green Deal and ensuring public participation, as required under the EU Treaties.<\/div>\n
\n
\u201cTargeting NGOs through a special scrutiny working group is a clear symptom of Europe\u2019s shrinking civic space. Civil society helped establish the EU\u2019s transparency rules \u2013 we welcome scrutiny, but not when it\u2019s selectively weaponised against those defending the public interest. With a robust discharge procedure already in place, this NGO-only process is unnecessary, unbalanced and politically driven,\u201d said Patrizia Heidegger, Deputy Secretary General, European Environmental Bureau.<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

 <\/p>\n

NOTES:<\/strong><\/div>\n
\u00a0<\/strong><\/div>\n