The European Parliament will this week adopt a much-anticipated position on the future of the long-term EU budget, amid mounting pressure to back its green rhetoric with real financial firepower.
On May 7th, MEPs are expected to approve the report titled “A revamped long-term budget for the Union in a changing world”, offering their official vision ahead of the European Commission’s formal proposal due in July.
At first glance, the Parliament’s stance makes all the right noises. It recognises the escalating urgency of the climate and biodiversity crises and asserts that a “bigger budget than ever before” is needed to meet the EU’s obligations under international environmental commitments. But scratch beneath the surface, and the report falls well short of the ambition many hoped for—and what the situation demands.
The EU’s long-term budget—known as the Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF)—might seem arcane to the uninitiated. Yet this seven-year fiscal roadmap, representing just 1% of the bloc’s GDP, is a cornerstone of public investment across the Union. It funds everything from cohesion and agriculture to climate action and nature protection. The next MFF will shape the continent’s response to environmental collapse well into the 2030s. And with national budgets squeezed by inflation, debt, and defence pressures, the EU budget is one of the last levers of collective public investment.
This is precisely why the Parliament’s reluctance to demand concrete spending targets on climate and nature is so concerning. Despite the report’s clear acknowledgement of the scale of the challenge, it offers little more than warm words where financial clarity is sorely needed.
“It’s not enough to agree that we need more money for climate and biodiversity,” said Ester Asin, Director of WWF European Policy Office. “Without bold, binding targets, this budget risks becoming yet another missed opportunity.”
There are, however, some signs of hope. The Parliament rightly defends the LIFE programme—a longstanding EU fund that underpins much of its environmental legislation—from being absorbed into a broader “Competitiveness” super-fund. The preservation of LIFE as a standalone mechanism is vital for delivering targeted and accountable green outcomes.
Likewise, MEPs push back against the Commission’s recent musings about consolidating a swathe of EU programmes into single national investment plans. Such centralisation would sideline regional and local authorities—those often best placed to implement climate solutions—and strip civil society of its essential oversight role.
Encouragingly, the Parliament has also drawn a red line against raiding climate and environmental funds to bankroll the EU’s growing appetite for defence and security spending. This is a crucial signal at a time when geopolitics increasingly threatens to overshadow environmental imperatives in Brussels’ corridors of power.
But even the most principled statements mean little without financial muscle behind them. The elephant in the room is subsidies. The Parliament’s report calls on the Commission to phase out environmentally harmful subsidies—a long-overdue demand, given the scale of the problem. WWF’s latest research reveals that nearly €32.1 billion in annual CAP (Common Agricultural Policy) funding—around 60%—actively undermines biodiversity. Redirecting even a portion of that could bridge the EU’s yawning nature investment gap.
As the legislative tug-of-war over the MFF begins, the Parliament’s report risks becoming a paper tiger—roaring on values, but toothless on funding. With member states notoriously defensive of national prerogatives and loath to spend more, the Commission and Parliament must go into negotiations armed with more than lofty aspirations. The climate crisis will not be solved by policy poetry.
The clock is ticking. Fires, floods, and failing ecosystems will not wait for the EU’s institutional machinery to creak into consensus. If the Union is serious about its Green Deal and its global leadership on climate, now is the moment to show it in euros—not just eloquence.
