Urgent LIFE-saving intervention required for European environmental NGOs

Everyone concerned about the health of the planet and of our democracies needs to stand with European green groups as we resist a concerted political campaign to defund us.

While the media spotlight has largely focused on Donald Trump and his administration’s frontal assault against climate policy and supposedly “woke” federal funding, this side of the Atlantic has also been witnessing attacks on similar targets, albeit in less spectacular fashion.

Take green NGOs. Since shortly after the European Union elections of last year, which emboldened certain anti-democratic and anti-climate forces, civil society organisations receiving funding from the EU’s LIFE programme, including Carbon Market Watch, have been under attack.

Why, you may wonder?

Certain MEPs allege that these NGOs have been weaponised by the European Commission to lobby the other EU institutions and even other directorates-general within the Commission itself to supposedly “shadow lobby” for the European Green Deal.

The charge against green NGOs is being spearheaded by Monika Hohlmeier, a Member of the European Parliament who serves on the Budget Committee. Ironically, Hohlmeier, on top of her generous MEP salary, also receives €75,000 a year to serve on the supervisory board of BayWa, according to Corporate Europe Observatory. BayWa is not only Germany’s largest agricultural trader, it has also received €6.5 million from the LIFE programme and lobbies in Brussels.

Hypocrisy?

We’ll let you be the judge of that. But it’s definitely a conflict of interests that should not and cannot be permitted. 

Vital LIFE support

Despite these aspersions and unsubstantiated allegations that “secret” contracts exist between the Commission and the NGOs that receive EU funding, nothing could be further from the truth and the mere suggestion betrays a wilful and malicious distortion of the facts.

Take us at Carbon Market Watch. It is no secret, and never has been, that CMW receives a core grant from the EU’s LIFE programme. It is clearly stated as one of our funding sources on our website and the LIFE logo appears in the footer of our website (scroll down and see for yourselves).

The reason we receive this grant is also clear and simple. Although civil society organisations represent the public interest, their shoestring budgets cannot compare with the deep pockets of large companies, which represent only private interests. 

To give some insight into the magnitude of the challenge, corporations and associations representing business interests spent a staggering €1.3 billion in 2023 to lobby the EU institutions, according to the 2024 EU Lobby Report.

In a bid to tilt this skewed playing field just a tiny fraction, the LIFE programme provides a little over €15 million a year to environmental NGOs (we have received around a quarter of million euros a year). To put this into context, that is just over one percent of what corporate lobbyists spend and less than the take-home pay of a single CEO of a medium-sized corporation.

Despite the small size of these grants, they are a vital lifeline for civil society organisations like Carbon Market Watch. Needless to say, this operating grant, like all other funding sources we receive, does not affect our independence, as demonstrated by the many critical stances we have taken against all the EU institutions.

Nobody’s mouthpiece

Some MEPs and hostile media outlets have presented a warped and untrue picture that the European Commission pays NGOs to be its unofficial mouthpiece in Brussels. But nothing could be further from the truth, as we clearly demonstrate every day at Carbon Market Watch.

This LIFE operating grant, like all other funding sources we receive, does not affect our independence, which is a central tenet of our mission. Based on and backed with scientific evidence, the only interests we represent are those of the public and its right to live in a healthy environment and overcome the climate crisis.

Our jealously guarded independence and well-researched standpoints are widely respected among stakeholders, from the media and civil society to politicians and policymakers, even among those who do not agree with us. That is one reason why these unsubstantiated attacks come as such a shock and surprise to anyone familiar with our work.

Watchdog, not lapdog

Far from being the European Commission’s lapdog, we take our responsibilities as a watchdog organisation seriously. That is why we are more often critical of the EU institutions, including the Commission, than we are supportive of them. 

That a political institution should provide funding to voices that might criticise it may strike some, especially those accustomed to authoritarian regimes, as counterintuitive. But that is both the beauty of democracy and a vital component of keeping it alive and vibrant.

Some recent examples can help illustrate this reality. We recently released a report that exposes how the EU’s Emissions Trading System is paying heavy industry billions to pollute rather than making them pay for their pollution. And in light of the European Commission’s backpedalling on the European Green Deal, we panned the recent so-called Clean Industrial Deal as a gift to big polluters that is industrial but anything but clean. 

Plenty of other examples abound. Just browse through our website or social media channels to find your own.

And it is likely this kind of principled criticism, rather than some non-existent and mythical pliability, that has made us enemies among certain pro-business and anti-climate types.

But we will not be cowed by these attacks. Like other independent NGOs, we are determined to continue to fulfil our mission of serving the public interest and advocating for robust climate action that serves the broad interests of society rather than the narrow interests of top corporate polluters.

To counter this malicious campaign, we will be engaging in joint action with civil society allies ahead of a crucial vote at the European Parliament net week. We count on your support. Contact your MEP or tag them on social media. Make your voice heard. The climate and democracy need (E)U.

Author

Related posts

There can be no flexibility in the EU’s 2040 climate target

Apparently, EU lawmakers are exploring four potential loopholes to weaken the target under the guise of “greater flexibility”. Under consideration are suggestions that include postponing climate action until the latter half of the 2030’s, allowing for more flexibility between EU sectors, or relying on international offsets and additional carbon removals to somehow fill the gap caused by EU inaction. 

Civil society must be included in EU policymaking

Carbon Market Watch and 550 civil society organisations from 40 countries are today joining forces to fight back against ongoing attacks against NGOs from centre-right and far-right political voices.

Join our mailing list

Stay in touch and receive our monthly newsletter, campaign updates, event invites and more.