Why won’t the EU fund organisations with a traditional view of the family?

 

The Federation of Catholic Family Associations in Europe (FAFCE) has accused the European Union of ‘ideological discrimination’ after being excluded from EU funding.

In recent months, FAFCE applied for six EU-funded projects focusing on demographic decline, youth policy and child protection, areas that are among the organisation’s long-standing priorities. All six submitted projects were rejected. According to the Commission’s evaluations, the proposals raised concerns regarding equality measures and compliance with EU values.

FAFCE strongly disputes this assessment. In response, FAFCE commissioned an external consulting firm, Theoria, to carry out an independent and objective analysis of the Commission’s evaluations. Theoria examined the project documentation and the evaluators’ comments and concluded that there was nothing in the proposals that could “contradict equality requirements”, as the Commission had claimed.

Theoria’s report goes further, raising concerns about a broader pattern in how EU funding applications are assessed. “From our experience,” the report states, “after reading hundreds of project proposal evaluations, evaluators never question the definition or operational implementation of values, with one exception: when the values are proposed by Christian or pro-life organisations.” The report speaks explicitly of “evident bias in the evaluation”.

FAFCE is not the only organisation denouncing bias. The World Youth Alliance (WYA) also claim their EU funding was rejected because of their pro-life views.

The Commission evaluations cited vague shortcomings in the FAFCE’s projects, such as insufficient discussion of gender disparities, limited safeguards against discrimination, or a lack of clarity on how EU values were “made operational”. Yet, according to Theoria, these criticisms were not supported by concrete examples or specific deficiencies in the projects themselves. In some cases, anonymous evaluators deducted significant points despite acknowledging that proposals met the relevant criteria, a practice that had the practical effect of pushing scores below the approval threshold.

There is little doubt that organisations that have a Christian understanding of the family are being judged and penalised not on the quality of their work, but on the worldview they represent.

FAFCE’s president, Vincenzo Bassi, has rejected the implication that the organisation’s work is not inclusive. “We cannot be put on trial for our intentions,” he said. “Our approach includes everyone; we are against no one.” He has also warned that the funding decisions threaten the organisation’s viability, as FAFCE operates on a very modest annual budget.

Founded in 1997, FAFCE represents 33 family associations from 21 European countries. Inspired by Catholic social teaching, it works on issues such as family policy, demographic decline, work–life balance, child protection, human dignity and social cohesion. FAFCE occupies a distinctive position in Brussels: it is the only pro-family non-governmental organisation at EU level that includes the term “Catholic” in its official name, and it is the only organisation representing families accredited to the Council of Europe.

Support for FAFCE has come from several politicians and civil society figures, who argue that excluding pro-traditional-family organisations weakens Europe’s ability to address challenges such as falling birth rates, social fragmentation and the protection of minors. Critics of the Commission’s decision warn that EU funding risks becoming a tool for enforcing ideological conformity rather than supporting genuine pluralism within civil society.