The EU’s antifraud watchdog said it has passed on to prosecutors allegations of potential corruption at the European Economic and Social Committee, a Brussels-based body that advises the EU on proposed legislation and policy.

OLAF, the antifraud office, received a report from whistleblowers earlier this year saying there was a conflict of interest in the management of funds at the EESC, which is financed by the EU. It has now passed the case to the European Public Prosecutor’s Office.

OLAF’s press office told POLITICO it had sent the case to EPPO but added that it could not comment further.

The EPPO did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

“The EESC was informed by OLAF yesterday that this case has been transmitted to the EPPO,” an EESC spokesperson told POLITICO.

“Under these circumstances, the EESC cannot comment further except to re-confirm that when these matters first arose, the EESC president immediately and proactively referred the allegations to OLAF. The EESC will continue to respect fully the independence of this process.” Séamus Boland of Ireland was elected president in October 2025.

“The EESC and its senior leadership take this matter very seriously and remain fully committed to integrity, transparency and accountability,” the spokesperson added.

The EPPO has significantly stronger enforcement powers than OLAF. Whereas OLAF conducts administrative investigations, the EPPO investigates crimes against the financial interests of the EU, and can search private homes or seize evidence.

OLAF has also been investigating a report that EESC executives tried to smoke out a staff whistleblower who raised the alarm about the funding concerns, the EU Ombudsman told POLITICO.

Anonymous letters, seen by POLITICO, say that IT workers at the EESC were asked by senior managers to identify which staffers had connected to the OLAF website in previous weeks.

The EESC said those anonymous letters contained “serious personal threats” and added that they were not made through the EESC’s “robust formal whistleblower process.”

La volonté de la Commission européenne de rendre les milliards de l’UE plus réactifs aux crises à venir pourrait aussi les rendre plus exposés aux risques d’abus, avertit la Cour des comptes européenne.

Son président Tony Murphy alerte que les principaux piliers de la réforme du budget à long terme de l’UE, élaborée par la Commission, risquent de brouiller la vision des agents chargés de veiller à ce que les fonds publics soient dépensés comme prévu.

“Il nous est plus difficile de suivre l’argent”, a-t-il souligné. “On dit à l’Etat membre : ‘Voici une somme considérable, et vous faites en sorte que tout est en ordre.’ C’est en quelque sorte d’autocontrôle.”

Cet avertissement intervient alors que l’épineux débat du montant du budget 2028-2034 de l’UE est au menu du sommet des dirigeants européens à Bruxelles cette semaine, et que la Cour a constaté une augmentation des irrégularités dans l’utilisation des fonds publics.

Outre le montant total des moyens, se pose la question de leur répartition. Après un cycle budgétaire marqué par la pandémie, les guerres et les conséquences du changement climatique, la Commission souhaite rendre le prochain budget plus agile. Pour ce faire, elle prévoit d’en affecter environ la moitié — soit près de 1 000 milliards d’euros sur sept ans — à une enveloppe unique dans laquelle les pays pourront puiser pour remplir leurs objectifs dans des domaines comme l’immigration, l’agriculture ou le développement régional.

Ces fonds destinés à l’agriculture et au développement régional — souvent octroyés sous forme de subventions aux exploitations agricoles et aux projets locaux — sont depuis longtemps exposés à la fraude et aux détournements.

Selon Tony Murphy, accorder aux gouvernements nationaux une plus grande marge de manœuvre pour réorienter leurs dépenses rendrait le suivi de ces dernières encore plus difficile.

“Il y aura une certaine flexibilité, mais à quel prix ?”, a-t-il soulevé lors d’une interview. Une grande partie du contrôle dépendra des mesures de surveillance que chaque pays a déjà mises en place.

D’autant que les irrégularités dans l’utilisation des fonds du budget de l’UE sont en hausse. Les erreurs de versement se sont élevées à 5 milliards d’euros l’année dernière, selon le dernier rapport de la Cour des comptes européenne.

Dans le prochain budget de l’UE, il pourrait même s’avérer impossible d’estimer ce chiffre, a prévenu Tony Murphy, car les auditeurs de chaque pays ont des rôles et des méthodes de travail différents. “Année après année, nous avons constaté que le travail de ces autorités d’audit n’est pas entièrement fiable”, a renchéri son chef de cabinet, Wolfgang Stolz, lors de l’entretien.

Dans un communiqué, la Commission a défendu sa proposition, soulignant que les “principes fondamentaux” du système de contrôle actuel resteraient en vigueur. Les autorités nationales “fonctionnent bien”, a-t-elle affirmé, tout en précisant qu’elle se réservait le droit de demander aux Etats membres de “modifier le plan ou de mettre en place des mécanismes de correction si nécessaire”.

Des fonds mélangés aux budgets nationaux

L’une des innovations proposées par la Commission consiste à intégrer la politique agricole commune (PAC) — qui constituait jusqu’à présent une ligne budgétaire à part entière — dans un fonds gigantesque appelé plan de partenariat national et régional.

Tony Murphy a souligné qu’il ne prônait pas un modèle plutôt qu’un autre. Mais à mesure que les fonds européens s’intègrent de plus en plus aux budgets nationaux, il sera plus difficile pour Bruxelles de contrôler où va réellement son argent. La PAC est plus facile à contrôler lorsqu’“elle n’est pas mélangée à ce méli-mélo”, a estimé le président de la Cour des comptes européenne.

Les articles de presse sur des subventions agricoles versées pour de faux pâturages en Grèce ou sur des fonds destinés à soutenir le tourisme rural en Slovaquie qui financent de luxueuses villas pour les riches illustrent de manière frappante la difficulté de contrôler ces versements dans le cadre du système actuel.

Et le modèle sur lequel repose le nouveau système de dépenses — le fonds de relance post-Covid de l’UE — n’est pas de bon augure, a pointé Tony Murphy. Si les pays ont désormais plus de facilité à affecter les fonds là où ils sont nécessaires, les dépenses sont également devenues plus opaques. Les nouveaux plans nationaux ont été élaborés selon le même modèle.

Dans le cadre du système budgétaire actuel, la Cour des comptes européenne peut se rendre physiquement sur place dans une exploitation agricole bénéficiant de fonds européens. En revanche, dans le cadre du fonds de relance post-Covid, l’UE ne publie chaque année que la liste des 100 principaux bénéficiaires.

“Ce n’est pas très transparent. Je veux dire, où va réellement l’argent de l’UE ? C’est ça qui compte”, a insisté Tony Murphy. “On a un fonds qui regroupe différentes politiques publiques, avec des objectifs et des échéances complètement différents, des mécanismes de mise en œuvre différents et moins de prévisibilité.”

Cet article a d’abord été publié par POLITICO en anglais, puis a été édité en français par Jean-Christophe Catalon.

TIRANA — The College of Europe’s Tirana office was among the latest casualties of escalating student protests gripping the Albanian capital.

The office for the school, which serves as a training ground for future EU civil servants, was broken into, looted and set on fire on Wednesday evening.

“Until yesterday, this was the office of the College of Europe,” Albanian Prime Minister Edi Rama said in an Instagram video delivered from the burned-out shell of the office. Rama’s own workplace is a stone’s throw from the Pyramid complex housing the College of Europe.

Rama said he did not believe the damage was down to the students. “Students are the future, they are the ones who look ahead, who want to go further and faster,” he said.

Instead, he accused his political opponents of being behind the destruction, claiming that they were attempting to undermine Albania’s progress. The opposition parties deny any wrongdoing.

The College of Europe in Tirana refused to comment.

Protests in Albania have been ongoing since late May against the proposed development of a luxury resort linked to U.S. President Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, and alleged government corruption. But the situation escalated on Tuesday and Wednesday as students from around the country clashed with police, set fire to government buildings and businesses linked to powerful businessmen, and damaged traffic lights, bus stops, and the city’s roads.

The Delegation of the European Union to Albania released a statement Thursday morning, condemning the destruction of private and public property and asking protesters to exercise restraint. “Violence has no place in democracies,” they wrote.`

Large swathes of the city were damaged during over 14 hours of protests Wednesday. The Ministry of Justice, Ministry of Education and Ministry of Finance, as well as a number of government institutions, banks, and private businesses, were broken into and set on fire. In centrally located Skanderbeg Square, protesters torched a large under-construction tower block, with flames reaching several floors.

With the destruction came many reports of police brutality, including against regular citizens and journalists. Several media workers were prevented from filming or had their equipment confiscated. On Tuesday, a young man required emergency surgery for a severely broken leg following an altercation with police.

At least 89 people required hospital treatment, including about 51 police officers, while many more protesters have reported minor injuries.

On Thursday, protests began again at 8 a.m., as students across Tirana boycotted lessons and marched toward the Ministry of Education. Police immediately dispersed demonstrators with tear gas and water cannons, while the unrest continued to spread to other parts of the capital, particularly near government institutions and the headquarters of Rama’s Socialist Party.

A parliamentary session for Thursday was canceled after students said they would not allow any deputies to access the assembly.

Protests also spread to other parts of Albania. Masked protesters clashed with police in multiple cities, with damage, fires, and violence reported across the country.

Many businesses throughout the capital were shuttered for the day, with owners putting up signs saying “we are with you, please don’t burn our businesses.”

The students and the so-called “Flamingo Revolution” protestors are demanding the resignation of Rama and the entire government, and a new start for Albania — including economic, educational, government, electoral and legal reform.

Rama told Reuters on Thursday that he has no intention of resigning.

LYMPNE, England — A Reform UK government would take a “keen look” at Britain’s support to Ukraine, the populist right-wing party’s leader Nigel Farage said Monday.

Farage said Ukraine is “one of the most corrupt countries on earth” and that he is “very worried” about where some of Britain’s money has ended up — while also acknowledging the threat from Russian President Vladimir Putin is now the greatest it has ever been.

The Reform leader added: “I’ve never said we shouldn’t support Ukraine — ever. But I have said I would like to have a keen look to make sure British taxpayers’ money is not being swallowed up in corruption.”

The Ukrainian embassy in London declined to comment.

The U.K. has committed £25 billion to Ukraine since Russia’s full-scale invasion, according to government figures published in July 2026. That includes £16 billion of military support, up to £5.6 billion in non-military support and a £3.5 billion cover limit for export finance.

Farage was answering questions at a press conference after Donald Trump deepened the gulf between Washington D.C. and Kyiv by saying he would suspend sanctions on Russian diesel exports. After Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy criticized the deal, Trump said Saturday: “It’s time for Ukraine to get a new president.”

Farage, an old ally of Trump who previously spoke at his campaign rallies, said he did not agree with the U.S. president’s decision to buy diesel from Russia, but criticized EU nations for “buying vast amounts of Russian petrochemicals” during the course of the war.

Farage also declined to agree with Trump’s call for regime change, saying: “I understand that Trump and Zelenskyy have a somewhat tempestuous relationship, so it’s not any particular surprise. At some point, Ukraine needs an election. That’s true if it is to be a country that aspires to have Western-style values. As to when that election comes, we’ll have to see. After all, we did have an election during World War Two.”

Asked if there is a limit to his support for Ukraine, Farage added: “No one’s support for Ukraine is limitless, is it? Is [U.K. Prime Minister] Andy Burnham’s support for Ukraine limitless? No, it’s not. But do we need to go on supporting Ukraine? 

“Look, this is one of the most corrupt countries on earth. We know that. I’ve been very, very worried about where some of our money has gone. And goodness me, Zelenskyy’s administration has been rocked by corruption claims, which perhaps makes at some point a general election there an important thing to do.

“But I am in no doubt at all that Putin now poses a greater threat than he’s posed at any point.”

Farage accused his critics of a “willful attempt to misconstrue” comments he made in 2024, when he said the eastward expansion of NATO and the EU gave Putin “reason to his Russian people” to justify the war. Farage said at the time: “We provoked this war. Of course it’s his fault — he’s used what we’ve done as an excuse.”

Farage said Monday that he believes NATO has been a “huge success over many, many years” and Britain’s role in the alliance is “a vital one, as a bridge between Europe and America, and keeping America on side with NATO.”

Right-wing rifts

Reform’s opinion poll lead ended in the summer and the party now trails four points behind Burnham’s center-left ruling Labour Party in POLITICO’s Poll of Polls. Polls currently predict that the right-wing vote would be split between Reform and the Conservative Party in a general election, due by 2029.

While Conservative Leader Kemi Badenoch said last week that she would sooner force a second general election than form a governing pact with Reform, Farage said he “would work with anybody from any party” after an election to see his plans through.

Farage was speaking at an industrial estate in Kent to pledge a series of hardline reforms to the migration system, including halting all asylum claims for five years and deporting anyone left on the waiting list for a decision.

Reform officials previously said that Farage planned to meet France’s National Rally Leader Marine Le Pen in late October, around the time the party holds its conference, and that he was examining a possible visit to Ukraine.

Farage avoided saying, when asked by POLITICO, if he would travel to meet leaders of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party. Instead he appeared to suggest that Reform was a more moderate alternative to far-right politics rising up in parts of Europe.

“I have friends in the AfD. I have some of the AfD I’m less certain about,” he said. “But it is quite ironic when people attack Reform and say Reform is extreme. I’ll tell you what. There is a politics now developing in Europe directly as a failure of migration policy that would make most people in Reform blush. And this is why our fighting the next general election and winning it is so important — because it might just be the last chance to re-establish trust and faith in the electoral system.”

BRUSSELS — It was meant to be Europe’s escape from the web of Chinese critical mineral supremacy.

But two years after it took effect, the EU’s Critical Raw Materials Act is not on schedule. Just one in four critical mineral projects granted special status under the law is on track to be ready on time, according to new analysis shared with POLITICO.

On Friday, EU industry chief Stéphane Séjourné will unveil a new list of critical mineral projects that will receive privileged access to funding, accelerated permitting and help from Brussels to find buyers.

The idea is to make Europe a major producer of materials essential to clean energy, tech, and defense manufacturing. It’s currently a heavy importer.

But progress on the first round of 47 projects, announced early last year, offers little hope for the bloc’s ambitions.

“At least one in three mining and processing strategic projects is either late, stalled, at risk, or no longer exists, and only about a quarter are clearly on track,” said Diego Marin, policy officer for raw materials at the European Environmental Bureau, citing publicly available sources. The findings will be published in a report later this month.

Financial, regulatory, and political hurdles are blocking European mining projects, the industry says, despite the Critical Raw Materials Act’s aim to speed up the time it takes to get the shovels in the ground.

The EEB’s findings were echoed in an industry call in August, where 23 projects named in the first round claimed some were facing “immediate jeopardy,” in a letter sent to the Commission and obtained by POLITICO.

Those same companies also believe that announcing more strategic projects will create more problems. However, a Commission official dismissed that claim, saying that some of those projects had received direct funding from the Commission, and claiming the companies believe new projects would “dilute their status.”

The EU unveiled 47 projects in March 2025, covering 14 of the bloc’s 17 designated strategic raw materials—from lithium, nickel, cobalt and graphite for electric vehicle batteries and rare earths for magnets used in wind turbines, to tungsten for military equipment and gallium for semiconductors. It also includes 13 projects from outside the bloc.

These were designed to deliver the EU’s raw materials targets: by 2030, the bloc aims to mine at least 10 percent, process 40 percent and recycle 25 percent of its own needs, while sourcing no more than 65 percent of any one material at any processing stage from a single non-EU country.

Breaking Europe’s dependence on China for key metals is at the heart of the policy, a goal European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen highlighted in her State of the Union speech last month. “We are more than 80% dependent on China for many critical raw materials [and] 90% for some rare earths,” she lamented. 

A Commission official said that if all goes to plan, the EU will meet its 2030 goals for lithium, cobalt and rare earths, but results for other materials are mixed, with shortfalls in nickel processing and recycling and across the manganese supply chain. They did not give hard figures, though.

Industry skeptical

“Unless something happens that is absolutely not foreseen today, we will be far, far away from reaching the targets, even if they are quite low,” said Jan Moström, former CEO of Swedish mining giant LKAB and outgoing president of Euromines. He said better access to financing and faster permitting was key.

The EU is under additional time pressure as a pause on China’s export controls on rare earth minerals is due to expire in January.

Global think tank ODI found in June that “out of 60 projects, 14 are unlikely to contribute by 2030 because their estimated start of production falls between 2029 and 2031,” and that “three out of four are either behind their expected schedule or impossible to verify using up-to-date public evidence” — backing up the EEB’s numbers. 

A European Court of Auditors report this year also revealed that “many projects will struggle to secure supply for the EU by 2030” and that there was “no proper tracking of results.” 

The European Commission questioned the current validity of the ECA’s findings, saying it “audited a period of policy that does not cover everything we’ve done since this mandate. So the Court of Auditors had very relevant points that we took into account in our policy, but should absolutely not be seen as a fair assessment of the work we’ve done with the von der Leyen Commission number two,” said a Commission official. 

Desperate times

Since adopting the Critical Raw Materials Act in 2024, Brussels has rolled out a flurry of initiatives to get projects moving. They include a proposed critical raw materials center, for which Parliament is seeking €2 billion; the “RESourceEU” plan that’s mobilized more than €2 billion; a mechanism to identify suppliers; and plans to revise water rules and speed up environmental impact assessments. 

But industry leaders say the EU is moving too slowly. 

“I’m still to be convinced that it makes any difference,” Michael Staffas, CEO of Swedish miner Boliden, told POLITICO when asked about the benefits of being designated as a strategic project. Boliden’s subsidiary Somincor was granted strategic status for a copper and zinc mine in Portugal. 

The “strategic project” label promised faster permitting and help securing public and private finance, with permitting deadlines of 27 months for mines and 15 months for processing and recycling projects.

“In Sweden you have different authorities that can basically object to a permit process and that in itself creates way longer time than 27 months, just the legislation,” said LKAB CEO Johan Menckel, whose company currently has three strategic projects.

One is the Per Geijer deposit, home to Europe’s largest rare-earth deposits, which the local indigenous Sámi community opposes, arguing it would harm their reindeer-herding tradition. 

The local administration recently recommended that the State Mining Authority grant the concession on the condition that the Swedish company “minimize the impact on the reindeer industry,” but that will be subject to appeal from the Sámi.

Karin K Niia, a Sámi reindeer herder, said in comments that the EU will be complicit in cultural genocide if the project goes ahead. 

Europe’s lithium hope

Europe’s biggest bet to escape China’s foothold in battery metal supply chains is the Barroso lithium mine in Portugal, run by UK-based mining company Savannah Resources. The company says the mine could supply enough lithium for around half a million electric-vehicle batteries a year.

“I don’t think the strategic project stamp and the [Critical Raw Materials Act] have been absolutely essential, but it wasn’t also supposed to be. It was supposed to, in my understanding, be important to set a framework under which Europe can do the right thing faster, better, and for the better benefit of the next generation of Europe,” Savannah’s CEO Emanuel Proença said, calling it just another piece of a very big puzzle. 

Europe’s lithium-refining ambitions are also faltering: France’s Viridian Lithium went bankrupt after failing to secure funding, while Portugal’s José de Mello Group was unable to finance its planned €492 million refinery — despite both projects winning strategic status in the EU’s first round.

Viridian Lithium spokesperson Luc Pez said the strategic project label was a ‘curse.’ 

Rio Tinto’s Jadar project in Serbia, one of the non-EU projects to gain strategic-project status, was meant to provide double Barroso’s lithium capacity and cater to up to 25 percent of Europe’s demand. That, however, was suspended because of permitting issues and became a widely protested project amid allegations of corruption and environmental concerns. 

That reflected the simple fact that people don’t like mines in their backyard — an obstacle for mining projects worldwide, but especially in Europe, which is densely populated and has strong civil society.

“These projects had strategic status, EU money and fast-track permits, and it still wasn’t enough,” said EEB’s Marin. “If the supply push can’t deliver even under those conditions, the EU has to take demand reduction and sufficiency seriously. We can’t permit our way out of a market problem.”

Frida Preuß contributed to this report.