This month, the EU is back to its old playbook: loosen the rules, boost corporate profits, and call it climate action. 

The InvestEU reform promises €50 billion in fresh investment, but instead of plugging gaps in the green transition, it risks pouring public money into fossil-linked firms and failing giants like Northvolt. Meanwhile, the EIB’s grievance system is still failing communities, and new project signings include energy monopolies, union-busting multinationals, and far-right sympathisers with a soft spot for greenwashing. From Iberdrola to Müller, the red flags are flying, but EU institutions keep signing the cheques.

Let’s get into it.

INVESTEU REFORM: A PATCHWORK THAT WON’T FIX THE HOLES

€50 billion more… for whom, exactly?: In February 2025, the EU Commission dropped a proposal for the reform of InvestEU, promising a streamlined system to unlock up to €50 billion in fresh investments by 2027. It is part of the Clean Industrial Deal and  the idea is to simplify rules to boost “competitiveness” — but here’s the catch: this reform ramps up public risk-taking without matching it with strong green or social strings attached. Companies could get taxpayer-backed support with fewer strings attached — no real proof of climate impact, no clear job creation, and zero guarantees on fair profit-sharing.

That’s a red flag when billions in public money are on the table: Increased  guarantees and the new option to provide equity can be fine — if companies receiving support are held to solid climate plans, share profits fairly, and don’t just funnel money into dividends. Even worse, the rules already in place are flimsy: polluting tech like carbon capture still qualifies, there’s no binding criteria for recipients, and no checks to see if projects actually deliver. Already now, there is a free pass to technologies prolonging the life of fossil fuels (hello carbon capture and storage), companies face no binding conditions to receive funding — and there’s no system in place to check whether publicly backed projects actually cut emissions or created jobs. The EU’s own Court of Auditors flagged this.

A refresher, just in case: InvestEU is a financing instrument that provides EU budget guarantees to the European Investment Bank and other implementing partners, enabling them to offer favourable loans and de-risk investments — primarily for private sector actors. It plays a key role in delivering the European Green Deal, with sustainable infrastructure among its core investment priorities.

Instead, what we’ve got: In the past years, Invest EU support went to fossil-heavy corporations like Engie and CEPSA (Moeve) cashing in despite poor climate records. Major banks like BNP Paribas, Société Générale, and Santander — still among the world’s top fossil fuel financiers — also landed favourable loans,  just like EV battery plants tied to legacy carmakers, with bankruptcies, safety issues, and no real strategy for a just transport transition. Yes, we are talking about you, Northvolt. 

The irony of it: 95% of final beneficiaries say their projects would not have happened without InvestEU. Not surprisingly…these companies and banks made multi billion profits in 2024. Did they need a top up of public funds? Clearly not - so much for “additionality.” InvestEU-backed projects lack transparency and public oversight: too many of these so-called “future-proof” investments end up reinforcing the same extractive, corporate-heavy model.

In a nutshell:  The Parliament is currently negotiating its position. We urgently call on the EU institutions to ensure InvestEU funding ONLY to proven sustainable solutions - companies reinvesting profits into a fully decarbonised business model, high quality jobs and local, public-good infrastructure. Because greenwashing €50 billion won’t build a fairer, more sustainable economy.

IT’S SPRINGS TIME

A regular MDBs get-together: Last week’s IMF–World Bank Spring Meetings saw the EIB in the mix, but it’s clear: the EIB is lagging behind its peers.

What’s the trouble? The EIB’s grievance handling is poor, and human rights oversight is lacking. This is highly problematic and when the Bank uses the guarantees from EFSDS+ for Global Gateway projects, it is unable to respect the NDICI Regulation requiring the respect for human rights, transparency,  accountability, the EIB consistently. For instance, it doesn’t clearly identify which projects are covered by the EU guarantee, making public scrutiny nearly impossible.

A mechanism that doesn’t measure up: The EIB's Complaints Mechanism (CM) is opaque, leaving complainants in the dark with no meaningful engagement or remedies—especially for marginalized communities impacted by its projects.

Not setting the bar: the EIB fails to deliver on transparency, lagging behind other MDBs in publishing critical data. Its due diligence policies and project assessment are weak, failing to adequately document or assess human rights risks, especially in high-risk projects. See Bankwatch and FIDH’s report for more details.

Breaking its own promises: The EIB hasn’t acted on European Ombudsman recommendations to improve environmental transparency, and it’s still missing a plan to strengthen its grievance mechanisms.

How to fix the broken: The Commission must demand the EIB discloses all projects covered by EU guarantees, showing how they align with human rights and environmental standards. The EIB must overhaul its Complaints Mechanism to make it independent, inclusive, and accountable. It also needs to beef up due diligence, including mandatory site visits for high-risk projects. The EIB’s failure to act is damaging the EU’s credibility as a leader in sustainable development—it’s time for real change.


WHAT’S COOKING AT THE EIB?

This month, the EIB approved 8 projects, while signed 10* and 1 under appraisal, 14 in the EU and 5 outside. Out of this, 4 were education-related projects, 4 were investments in transport, 4 for energy, 2 for water and sewage, 2 for industry, 2 for services and 1 for urban development.

*What’s the difference between signed and approved? An approved project has been reviewed and endorsed by the EIB's Board of Directors but has not yet reached the final agreement stage, its terms and conditions are still being finalized. A signed project has gone through all negotiations, and a formal financing agreement has been concluded between the EIB and the project promoter.


In the spotlight - part I: 

A bad business partner = a bad deal (shocker)
Let’s rewind: Iberdrola — a Spanish energy giant — is one of the EIB’s top clients. Since 2020, it’s raked in €3.5 billion in loans from the Bank… while pulling in €4.8 billion in profits in 2023 alone.

Cheap talks on “local well-being”: EU’s largest solar plant in Spain is under an EPPO fraud probe, built on illegally expropriated land, and delivered just 5 permanent jobs.

That’s not it: A 2007 Iberdrola-triggered fire displaced 500+ families. The company tried to block justice for victims for over 15 years — compensation is still pending.

The map of harm: Global Atlas of Environmental Justice links Iberdrola to 13 socio-environmental conflicts across Central America, Brazil, and Europe — mostly tied to mega-projects bulldozing communities and ecosystems

Gatekeeping renewables: Iberdrola, together with Endesa and Naturgy,  controls 90% of Spain’s grid — and have been deliberately slowing down collective self-consumption projects, says Fundación Renovables.

Revolving door deluxe: Ex-EIB VP Emma Navarro joined Iberdrola just 3 months after leaving the bank — she had signed off on €145 million in green loans to the company. Over 30 ex-public officials have landed cozy gigs at Iberdrola.

<3 nuclear: In 2024, nearly 50% of Iberdrola’s energy mix still came from nuclear and fossil gas. This year, the company has been warning that energy prices might soar if Spain shuts down nuclear plants - pretty interesting take, given that Spain brought Iberdrola to court over alleged price manipulation.

Greenwashing gets awkward: In 2024, oil giant Repsol accused Iberdrola of greenwashing. Yes, even polluters are calling each other out now.

THE question: Why is public money being used to de-risk investments for billion-euro corporations?, you might ask.  Our report unpacks this trend of funnelling public funds into private hands. Spoiler: since 2020, 7 big corporations have made €100 billion in profits — more than the EIB’s yearly lending and half of what’s needed to meet EU social infrastructure needs — while receiving €11.3 billion in EIB loans.

In the spotlight, part II:

Fattening up with public money: The Theo Müller Group is a large multinational food and beverage company, one of the biggest worldwide. In 2024, the group generated a preliminary turnover of €9.3 billion, yet it is still receiving public funds to test its own products.

Union busting & worker abuse: The group has a track record of undermining unions, intimidating staff, and relying on precarious labour in its factories and logistics chains across Europe.​ In 2024, the NGG, the  oldest German trade for the food and beverage sector, launched a petition against the closure of the Landliebe dairy plants, owned by Müller, which will lay off hundreds of workers. Similarly, in 2022, nearly 70 HGV drivers and shunters employed by the company have been on strike over imposed rota changes.

Tax dodging deluxe: Despite billions in revenue, the group is known for aggressive tax avoidance strategies — funnelling profits through Luxembourg and Switzerland while benefiting from public subsidies.​

Factory farms & greenwashing: Müller claims to source from industrial dairy farms with appalling animal welfare records, while marketing itself as “natural” and “sustainable”. Yet, Viva! and The Independent reported a series of abuses on animals in Müller-related farms. 

Tears on spilled glass(es) of milk: The past week, Müller has urged producers to dispose milk due to collection stoppages - an operational glitch, to put it lightly - that caused thousands of litres of milk to be wasted, affecting more than 100 farmers already under immense financial pressure.  Last year, the company notified 26 farms that they will be losing contracts if unable to increase milk production.

The cherry on the cake? the yogurt that tastes far-right: Company boss Theo Müller openly supports Germany’s far-right AfD. His family has long donated to nationalist and climate-denialist causes. ​

Signed & sealed

Related articles

Newsletter I MarchSimon n im O Ta VLS Xw unsplash

Newsletter • 27 Mar 2025

EIB's latest hits

Newsletter | FebruaryDylan shaw xc h G9 Dwex I unsplash

Newsletter • 27 Feb 2025

Cash flow, no glow