On 10 June 2026, the European Parliament's EPP group tabled four amendments to the draft report on reinforcing development cooperation to address irregular migration (A10-0147/2026), proposing a fundamental shift from a developmental approach to a security and deterrence-oriented framework. The amendments introduce conditionality linking development aid to third-country cooperation on returns, endorse external asylum processing and return hubs, and frame migration as a hybrid threat requiring operational countermeasures. These changes would directly impact EU development policy, third-country partners, EU agencies, and the asylum system's legal architecture.
The amendments, all proposed by the EPP group, target the report by rapporteur Lukas Mandl (EPP, Austria) on reinforcing development cooperation to address irregular population movements. The report, at the committee stage, is scheduled for plenary debate and vote later in June 2026. The EPP's proposals represent a clear attempt to harden the Parliament's stance ahead of the final vote, positioning the group against the likely positions of the Greens/EFA and The Left, who generally oppose externalising asylum procedures and linking development aid to migration control conditionality. The S&D and Renew Europe groups may face internal divisions, with some members supporting stronger return policies while others resist explicit endorsement of third-country processing hubs.
Conditionality and sanctions Amendments 2 and 5 introduce the most significant change: an explicit call for "appropriate measures" and "conditionality" across visa, trade, and development policies against third countries that fail to cooperate on return and readmission. This transforms the report from a cooperative development tool into a coercive leverage mechanism, directly linking development aid to migration control performance. The amendments would empower the Commission to impose sanctions on non-cooperative partner countries, potentially straining diplomatic relations and reducing the effectiveness of long-term development programmes.
External processing and return hubs Amendment 3 formally welcomes the Chișinău Declaration and calls for "new approaches" including processing asylum applications in third countries and establishing "third-country return hubs." This is a major policy shift, endorsing the externalisation of EU asylum procedures—a concept previously rejected by the Parliament in other contexts. If adopted, this would mark a departure from the EU's traditional commitment to processing asylum claims within its territory, raising legal and human rights concerns.
Instrumentalisation of migrants Amendment 4 introduces a new paragraph calling for enhanced capacity to "prevent and respond to the instrumentalisation of migrants." This frames migration as a hybrid threat and calls for operational cooperation with partner countries and EU agencies to counter such actions, further securitising the development-migration nexus. The amendment would require EU agencies like Frontex and the European Asylum Support Office to develop new operational protocols, potentially diverting resources from humanitarian assistance.
Impact on stakeholders The amendments would have a moderate to major impact on several stakeholders. EU development agencies and NGOs would face reduced flexibility and potential funding cuts if conditionality is applied, undermining long-term development goals. Third countries, particularly those in Africa and the Middle East, would face increased pressure to cooperate on returns or risk losing visa, trade, and development benefits, potentially destabilising fragile states. EU asylum authorities would need to establish and oversee external processing hubs, requiring new legal frameworks and operational capacity. Migrants and asylum seekers would face reduced access to EU territory and potentially lower protection standards in third-country hubs, raising human rights concerns. On the positive side, the amendments could reduce irregular arrivals and deter smuggling networks by creating legal pathways and swift returns, benefiting EU border management and domestic political stability.
Institutional follow-up The amendments will be debated in the European Parliament's Committee on Development (DEVE) and subsequently put to a plenary vote, expected in late June 2026. If adopted, the report will become the Parliament's position, influencing the Commission's future proposals on migration and development. The Council, which has already endorsed stronger return policies in the Pact on Migration and Asylum, may welcome the shift, but divisions among member states on external processing could delay consensus. Trilogue negotiations would follow if the Commission proposes legislation based on the report.
← Atlas › News › Development & Humanitarian Aid