Euroviews: Using Public Funds to Manipulate the Public Isn’t Policy — It’s Propaganda

Last week, Welt am Sonntag exposed a scandal that strikes at the heart of the European Union’s democratic integrity. Leaked documents reveal that the European Commission covertly diverted taxpayer money to environmental NGOs—not to enforce environmental laws, but to wage political campaigns targeting private German companies. This is not policy. This is political sabotage.

A Secret Political Campaign

The revelation is deeply troubling: Commission officials allegedly collaborated with NGOs such as Friends of the Earth to undermine the EU–Mercosur free trade agreement, even while other parts of the Commission were actively supporting it. This double game illustrates a disturbing shift: using public funds not for transparency or science, but for orchestrated political influence.

Commission spokespersons have dismissed the allegations, claiming there are no secret contracts . Yet if the contracts—or payments—truly exist and aren’t made public, their denial appears disingenuous. Transparency is the test.

A Constitutional Breach

This is more than a matter of optics—it’s a constitutional violation. Democratic institutions must remain neutral. Germany’s Federal Constitutional Court set a clear precedent in 2022 when it ruled that former Chancellor Merkel overstepped by publicly criticising a regional election result. State actors cannot interfere in political outcomes. By outsourcing political influence to NGOs using public funds, the Commission breaches its constitutional duty to remain impartial.

Europe’s Charter of Fundamental Rights enshrines freedoms such as expression, association, and equal treatment. But when the EU finances groups to bypass limits on direct political lobbying, these rights are eroded. NGOs become proxy combatants for the Commission, rather than checks on power.

The NGO Gambit

What’s more, a growing trend has emerged where NGOs act less like independent civic actors and more like “government-funded PR firms.” The conservative think tank MCC Brussels has labeled this the “EU‑NGO propaganda complex,” and is calling for the establishment of an “EU DOGE”—a watchdog modelled after controversial U.S. oversight efforts—amid allegations of “brazen misuse of taxpayer funds” politico.eu+5brussels.mcc.hu+5reddit.com+5.

Meanwhile, the European Court of Auditors has criticised the Commission’s opaque grant monitoring: over €7 billion was distributed to some 90 NGOs in 2021–23, with unclear oversight of whether funds supported public interest or political agendas politico.eu.

Weaponising Public Money

Even the Commission’s Budget Commissioner admitted that some LIFE Programme grants may have “obliged NGOs to lobby MEPs specifically,” a clear breach of allowable use of EU funds foreignpolicy.com+12euronews.com+12politico.eu+12. The result: campaigns financed with taxpayer money, aimed at swaying MEPs and public opinion—all while the public remains largely unaware.

The Commission’s own CERV program has funded NGOs that echo and reinforce EU narratives, exerting soft influence over the broader media landscape brussels.mcc.hu+6europeanconservative.com+6yournews.com+6.

Democracy at Risk

When public funds are used to engineer political outcomes, democracy itself is undermined. Political neutrality isn’t optional—it’s the foundation of public trust. The EU’s power should serve citizens—not firms or political agendas. Misusing that power, even via nonprofit intermediaries, subverts the democratic process.

A Call for Transparency, Not Propaganda

Steinhöfel captures it bluntly: “Using public funds to manipulate the public is not policy. It’s propaganda.” Neither institutional window-dressing nor clever phrasing can obscure that. If the Commission is serious about defending democracy and fundamental rights, it must start by respecting both. That means:

1. Full transparency: All grants to NGOs should be published and open to scrutiny.
2. Clear rules: No public money for partisan campaigning—directly or indirectly.
3. Rigorous oversight: Auditors must ensure funding is for public-interest purposes—not covert lobbying.

Only by confronting this scandal head-on can EU institutions rebuild trust. Public funds are for public good—not political manipulation. Anything less is a betrayal of European democracy.

Conclusion: A Line Must Be Drawn

The revelations about the European Commission’s quiet coordination with NGOs to influence political outcomes are more than an embarrassment — they strike at the legitimacy of the EU itself. Public funds should never be weaponised to steer public opinion, attack private entities, or subvert democratic processes under the guise of advocacy.

Whether through silence or secrecy, the Commission’s alleged conduct points to a dangerous drift away from transparency and neutrality. Political influence cloaked in NGO activism is still political influence — and when it is funded by taxpayers without their knowledge, it ceases to be democratic.

If the EU is to maintain its credibility as a guardian of rights and rule of law, it must start by practicing what it preaches. That means drawing a clear line between policy and propaganda, between support and subversion — and keeping that line public, visible, and accountable.