Executive Vice-President Roxana Mînzatu, in a written answer on 24 July 2026, defended the Jean Monnet Actions against accusations that they promote a federalist vision of European integration, insisting that the programmes uphold academic freedom and critical thinking. The answer, responding to a parliamentary question from seven MEPs led by Catherine Griset (PfE), sought to reassure that safeguards exist to ensure academic rigour and neutrality. Mînzatu stressed that higher education institutions retain full autonomy over project content and that funding decisions are based on expert evaluations against predefined criteria, with the Commission never interfering in academic output.
The question, tabled by MEPs from the Patriots for Europe and Europe of Sovereign Nations groups, had challenged the Commission on whether Jean Monnet Actions — which fund EU studies chairs, courses and research at over a thousand universities — risked favouring a pro-integration narrative at the expense of critical or sovereignty-oriented perspectives. The MEPs asked what safeguards ensure academic rigour, whether funding is assessed to prevent promotion of a uniquely federalist vision, and whether the Commission would publish an independent assessment of the political impact of the actions.
mandatory evaluations under Article 24 of the Erasmus+ Regulation, an open and competitive selection procedure based on excellence and merit, and assessment by impartial external experts against criteria published in the Programme Guide. She emphasised that projects may explore critical or underrepresented viewpoints and that transparency and accountability are ensured through clear criteria, documented procedures, and financial oversight.
The answer contained no concrete proposals for new assessments or changes to the programme, instead reiterating existing mechanisms. The Commission's position signals a continued commitment to the current framework, with no indication of a review of the political or ideological impact of the funding. The response may leave some MEPs unsatisfied, as it did not address the call for an independent impact assessment. Stakeholders affected include EU universities and researchers, who benefit from continued funding autonomy; MEPs critical of EU federalism, who may view the answer as insufficient; and the Commission itself, which defends its programme's integrity against sovereignty-focused critiques.