European Parliament reaffirms EIB’s role as Climate Bank, but pushes for financing weapons

On July 8th, the European Parliament (EP) adopted a resolution on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank (EIB) in 2024. The report, drafted by rapporteur Francisco Assis (S&D), takes stock of the Bank’s operations and outlines political recommendations for the coming years.  The report was approved with 417 votes in favour, 188 against, and 75 abstentions.

EU Climate Bank

The EP reaffirms the EIB’s role as the EU’s Climate Bank, aligning with the EU priorities and the objective of achieving climate neutrality by 2050. It emphasises the need to maintain this level of ambition to reinforce the EU’s energy security, industrial resilience, and global competitiveness.

However, during the plenary session on the report, far-right Members of the European Parliament (MEPs), many of whom are climate change deniers, rejected this climate mandate, claiming it reflects an ideological agenda that prevents the Bank from addressing what they view as Europe’s most urgent socio-economic needs.

At the same time, the Parliament failed to acknowledge major shortcomings in the EIB’s climate policy, particularly its inability to fully phase out fossil fuel support. No mention was made of the loopholes through which €10 billion has flowed to banks and companies still expanding fossil fuel activities, or of the continued support for fossil-based hydrogen and carbon capture and storage (CCS), as highlighted in the latest Counter Balance’s report, Behind EIB’s Green Curtains.

Social Infrastructure, Cohesion Policy and Housing

The report welcomes the EIB’s core strategic priorities to reinforce Europe’s social infrastructure and a modern cohesion policy for inclusive and sustainable growth across Europe. It also calls on the EIB to ensure a more balanced geographical distribution of investments aiming to maximise its impact across all EU regions. Some MEPs rightly emphasised the Bank’s crucial role in supporting social infrastructure.

The EP also welcomes the EIB’s €10 billion Action Plan for Affordable and Sustainable Housing over the next two years and acknowledges the estimated €300–400 billion annual investment gap for housing construction and renovation.

However, the resolution fails to address the EIB’s vague definition of affordable housing, which often does not reflect the real needs of those most affected by the housing crisis. There is no clear mention of the need to prioritise social and truly affordable housing for people in vulnerable situations. In many cases, what is labeled as affordable simply means rent set below market rates, but even that remains unaffordable for low-income families, especially in cities where housing costs are already high. The EIB needs to go further by putting the people who are most in need at the centre of its housing strategy.

Defence and Security

The EP acknowledged the EIB’s approach in financing security and defence, with investments doubling from €1 billion in 2024 to a planned €2 billion in 2025, and according to the Board of Governors, the revised target now reaches €3.5 billion.  The EP also asks to change the policy even more, to also include financing weapons and ammunition, which the bank currently doesn’t allow yet. According to EIB Vice president Robert de Groot, the EIB is not the right type of institution to make such investments.

A significant number of MEPs used their speaking time to call for increased EIB financing for defence and security, without acknowledging the potential risks such investments pose to European citizens. This increase in military spending, especially the projects which only have a military use are highly worrying, which as we said in a newsletter, are bad economics and worse ethics: Studies across Europe, the UK and US show that public services, green energy, and environmental protections create more jobs and economic growth than military spending.

The MEP Marc Botenga (The Left), was one of the few, that openly criticized the expansion of defence financing, denouncing the EIB’s growing support for military bases and multinational arms manufacturers, as well as institutions linked to the genocide in Palestine. Botenga also condemned the use of public funds to support the military-industrial complex at the expense of essential services like healthcare, education, and housing.

During the vote, Botenga submitted an oral amendment urging the EIB to end financial support to companies complicit in the illegal Israeli occupation of Gaza, but the proposal was rejected by the majority of the Parliament. This silence and refusal to act expose a deep inconsistency in the EU’s stated commitment to human rights and international law.

Digital and Clean Tech 

Robert de Groot, highlighted in his speech that the bank aims to support deep tech, artificial intelligence (AI), semiconductors, and digital infrastructure through the TechEU programme.  He also mentioned the Bank plans to mobilise €250 billion by 2027 in cleantech investments, which are expected to reduce energy costs and boost EU innovation capacity.

Cleantech innovation plays a key role in the EU’s ambitions to boost its competitiveness. However, cleantech is not always sustainable. Many of these technologies are material and resource intensive, such as batteries and renewable-based hydrogen, as highlighted in the latest Counter Balance’s report, Behind EIB’s Green Curtains.  This approach risks wasting public funds on concessional loans, grants and guarantees for private sector cleantech projects that rely on subsidies to maintain high profit margins for the project promoters instead of a strategy aimed at resource-use reduction, including energy and raw materials, public benefits and upholding labour rights. Furthermore, the current patent framework impedes innovation and technology transfer, since a wide majority of cleantech patents are held  by companies in the Global North.

EIB neighbourhood and Global Gateway

Maria Luís Albuquerque, Commissioner for Financial Services and the Savings and Investments Union emphasised the strategic role of the EIB Global: strengthen the EU strategic interest around the world, in terms of economic security, trade and local industry resilience. As the main implementer of the Global Gateway, the EIB is central to the EU’s global outreach strategy.

However, it is important to underline that the EU’s role in the world must be based on mutually beneficial, transparent, and accountable cooperation, not on expanding EU geopolitical influence or securing market access under the guise of development. In a joint letter to Commissioner Jozef Síkela, more than 50 civil society organisations (CSOs) expressed serious concerns about the Global Gateway’s impact on the Global South. They warned that the current approach risks reproducing extractivist and neocolonial dynamics, undermining local sovereignty, and prioritising European strategic interests over the real needs and rights of communities in partner countries.

As the EIB continues to expand its global operations, it must be held to the highest standards of development effectiveness, transparency, and democratic accountability, and must ensure that its investments truly support local development.

Accountability and Transparency

The EP stresses that the EIB’s growing influence must be accompanied by stronger democratic accountability. It reiterates its call for an interinstitutional agreement between the EIB and the EP, including regular dialogue, access to documents, and the ability to submit written questions. MEPs also point to the fact that there is no external oversight of the Bank and govern the size and complexity of the Bank’s operations, call on the Board of Governors to make changes and ensure external oversight mechanisms will be created. The many mismanagement issues that have been reported about the Bank make such oversight and democratic accountability more necessary than ever.

The resolution also highlights the importance of the EIB ensuring full transparency and traceability of projects funded, including more detailed information, to enable proper oversight by all relevant stakeholders, including CSOs, rather than solely by the ministries responsible. In light of the EIB’s expanding role, increasing financial power, and channeling billions of public funds into critical sectors, ensuring robust transparency and accountability is more urgent than ever. Yet, the institutional mechanisms to monitor and challenge those decisions remain weak or inaccessible, raising serious concerns about democratic control and the effective use of EU resources.

Reflecting this concern, 22 civil society organisations issued a joint letter denouncing the EIB’s persistent lack of transparency. They highlighted that the EIB falls behind other multilateral development banks (MDBs) in human rights due diligence, relies on project promoters for impact assessments, lacks an independent complaints mechanism, offers limited public participation, and fails to ensure transparent evaluation of project impact.

Pic: © European Parliament - Source : EP