Revealed: EU plan to merge aid funds raises fears of potential cuts

The European Union has triggered fears of further international aid cuts after drawing up plans to merge its funding tools for development and relief programs with its priority work to prepare new member countries. The proposal would create “a single instrument” covering development spending, humanitarian aid, and assistance to neighboring nations seeking to join the bloc, according to a confidential document seen by Devex. The move — prompted by the new European Commission’s desire to streamline its many funding streams — would sweep away the Neighbourhood, Development and International Cooperation Instrument, or NDICI, and humanitarian aid instrument, or HUMA, both created in 2021. They would be integrated with the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance, or IPA, which helps applicant countries on the EU’s eastern border carry out reforms and bolster their structures to meet the required EU standards for membership. Civil society organizations fear the single instrument would lead to a repeat of the 2024 controversy that saw €2 billion (then worth $2.17 billion) shifted from development aid to help fund the EU’s crackdown on unauthorized migration. With minimal ring-fencing of funds, and less detailed programming, it would be easier for the commission — with its growing focus on tougher borders, to combat a surge in support for far-right parties — to divert spending to migration management, as well as make it harder to track how money is being spent, CSOs fear. “This is an extreme form of simplification that will substantially undermine the impact of each instrument, blow apart aid effectiveness principles, and likely lead to budget cuts for humanitarian aid and development cooperation,” Kasia Lemańska, EU representative at Dutch NGO Aidsfonds, told Devex. Antonio Gambini, Oxfam’s EU aid expert, echoed the fear of a further shift away from funding development to greater spending on migration control, saying: “Aid – both humanitarian and development – should be ring-fenced, and not politicised and actually serve people in need”. A position paper published by Aidsfonds, Global Citizen, the Pandemic Action Network, and the ONE Campaign, argued that only by having separate instruments can Europe “effectively pursue its humanitarian, development, and enlargement objectives without compromising their integrity, focus, or visibility.” It also warned: “It is unclear who would provide the strategic steer for implementing a single, merged external instrument. Currently, each instrument operates with its own governance structure and accountability mechanisms, which are essential for ensuring transparency and effectiveness.” The proposal is confirmed in the document seen by Devex, which is believed to have been issued by the French government for internal EU discussions, appearing to reveal opposition in Paris to the move to a single instrument. The paper stated: “The instrument for humanitarian aid must remain clearly distinct and benefit from its own dedicated envelope. Similarly, the instrument dedicated to pre-accession and enlargement, which follows its own logic, should remain a separate instrument.” The European Commission did not respond to a Devex request to set out the status of the proposal and respond to the criticisms made. The single instrument would be introduced for the 2028 start of the EU’s next seven-year budget round, the Multiannual Financial Framework, or MFF. Discussions have already begun for what will be a complex and hotly fought process. The proposal follows Devex’s report that the EU is considering consolidating management of its foreign aid in 18 regional hubs instead of embedding development experts with delegations in individual countries, also prompting fears of lower-quality development work. Update, Jan. 22, 2025: This piece has been updated to clarify the name of the Pandemic Action Network.