Where the Money Comes From

Every political programme must answer one question: where does the money come from?

AURIO’s answer is specific. Greece already has access to over €70 billion in EU funding for the 2021-2027 programming period, plus a national budget of approximately €77 billion per year. The problem is not the money. The problems are who gets it, what it is spent on, and who decides.

Greek State Budget 2026

Total state expenditure: approximately €77 billion.

Greece posted a primary surplus of €8.1 billion in 2025, exceeding the target by 52%. The fiscal space exists.

Source: Greece Draft Budgetary Plan 2026, submitted to the European Commission. Ministry of Economy and Finance.

EU Funding Available to Greece (2021-2027)

Source: European Commission country pages, Greece 2.0 (greece20.gov.gr), EU Cohesion Data Portal.

Recovery and Resilience Fund Breakdown

Total: €35.9 billion (€18.2 billion grants + €17.7 billion loans).

As of March 2026, Greece has received over €24.5 billion (68% of total). All measures must be completed by August 2026.

Source: European Commission Recovery and Resilience Facility country page, Greece 2.0.

Pillar by Pillar: Where AURIO’s Policies Are Funded

Pillar 1: Food Sovereignty

Available funding: CAP Strategic Plan €13.4 billion (2023-2027). LEADER/CLLD estimated €500 million+. ESPA rural development components.

The problem: €9.6 billion of the CAP goes to direct payments that disproportionately benefit large farms. Small cooperative farms, seed libraries and local food networks receive minimal support. Greece’s agriculture budget is being cut 25% (€440 million reduction). Meanwhile the EU-Mercosur deal threatens Greek rice (240,000 tons/year) and honey (25,000 tons/year) producers with duty-free South American imports.

AURIO’s argument: Redirect CAP investment support toward small cooperative farms. Use LEADER/CLLD for local food network infrastructure. Municipal food procurement mandates (30% local sourcing) require political will, not new money. Oppose the EU-Mercosur deal.

Pillar 2: Community Energy

Available funding: €13.7 billion green transition (RRF). €768 million REPowerEU. ESPA energy components.

The problem: Greece has legislation for energy communities (Law on Energy Communities) but almost no funding reaches community projects. Corporate interests dominate the renewable energy transition. The money exists. The access does not.

AURIO’s argument: Legislate guaranteed grid access for community energy cooperatives. Allocate a defined share of green transition funding to community-owned projects. Community benefit obligations for the Alexandroupolis LNG terminal.

Pillar 3: Local Economy

Available funding: €5.2 billion SME support through RRF. ESPA regional development. LEADER/CLLD.

The problem: Recovery funding reaches Athens and Thessaloniki disproportionately. Municipal procurement defaults to large contractors and chains.

AURIO’s argument: Local procurement mandates for municipal contracts require no new money, only political will. Redirect SME support toward regions outside Athens and Thessaloniki. Support cooperative development through existing ESPA and LEADER mechanisms.

Pillar 4: Direct Democracy

Available funding: No dedicated budget needed.

The problem: Participatory budgeting is a governance reform, not a spending item. Greek municipal budgets exist. The question is who decides how they are spent. No Greek legislation currently mandates participatory budgeting.

AURIO’s argument: Legislate participatory budgeting at municipal level. Allocate 10% of discretionary municipal budgets to direct citizen decision making. Administrative cost is minimal. Porto Alegre demonstrated this in 1989. Over 7,000 cities worldwide now use it.

Pillar 5: Education as Liberation

Available funding: €6.7 billion education budget. €7.8 billion digital transformation (RRF). ESPA social and education components.

The problem: Education is being cut 10% (€700 million reduction over 2026-2029). Greek teachers earn 31% less than other tertiary-educated workers, the worst gap in the OECD. Finland spends a similar percentage of GDP on education but achieves radically better outcomes.

AURIO’s argument: This is a reallocation argument, not a new spending argument. Reduce standardised testing (saves money). Invest in teacher training and status (reallocate within existing budget). Use digital transformation funding for craft-based training programmes delivered by SMEs in communities.

Pillar 6: Border Region Justice

Available funding: €1.6 billion migration and border funds (AMIF + BMVI). Interreg cross-border programmes. ESPA regional components. LNG terminal revenue.

The problem: Almost all EU border funding goes to security infrastructure (surveillance, detention, fencing), not community economic development. Evros hosts an LNG terminal supplying nine countries, a NATO logistics hub and migration infrastructure. The host community receives security spending and chronic underinvestment in everything else.

AURIO’s argument: Community benefit framework legislation. When a region provides Europe with a border, an energy gateway and a military platform, the host community receives proportionate investment in return. Redirect a share of border and migration funding from security hardware to local economic development. This is a legislative proposal, not a spending request.

Pillar 7: Culture as Infrastructure

Available funding: Culture ministry budget (small, exact figure not published). LEADER/CLLD. ESPA cultural and tourism components.

The problem: Culture is funded as an afterthought, not as economic infrastructure. Rural cultural programming receives almost nothing.

AURIO’s argument: Fund cultural programming from economic development budgets, not just the culture ministry. LEADER/CLLD can fund village cultural programmes. Municipal cultural programming creates economic activity through food, drink and accommodation spending that did not exist before. The return on investment is measurable.

Pillar 8: European Sovereignty / Foreign Policy

Available funding: Defence budget €7 billion (rising). €30 billion in arms procurement to 2036.

The problem: Greece spends more on defence as a share of GDP than almost any other EU member. The EU-Mercosur deal sacrifices Greek agricultural interests for German industrial exports. Military cooperation with Israel continues while international law is violated in Gaza.

AURIO’s argument: Push for EU strategic autonomy to reduce national defence burden over time. Oppose Mercosur. Adopt the Spain position on Gaza. These are policy positions, not spending items, but they have budget implications: reduced arms spending as EU defence integration progresses, protected agricultural revenue through trade policy.

The Core Argument

Greece does not lack money. It lacks political will to spend it differently.

Over €70 billion in EU funds are available this programming period. A national budget of €77 billion per year generates consistent surpluses. Defence spending rises while education and agriculture are cut.

AURIO’s programme is not a wish list. It is a reallocation argument. The money exists. The question is whether it serves communities or corporations, whether it builds villages or buys weapons, whether it funds cultural programming or surveillance infrastructure.

The budget is a statement of values. AURIO’s values are clear.

Sources

• Greece Draft Budgetary Plan 2026, Ministry of Economy and Finance (minfin.gov.gr)
• European Commission: Greece Recovery and Resilience Plan (greece20.gov.gr)
• European Commission: ESPA 2021-2027 Partnership Agreement for Greece
• European Commission: Greece CAP Strategic Plan 2023-2027
• European Commission: Migration and Home Affairs, Financial Support to Greece
• EU Cohesion Data Portal (cohesiondata.ec.europa.eu)
• Greek City Times: Greece Budget 2026
• OECD: Government at a Glance 2025, Greece
• Eurydice: Education funding and teacher salaries, Greece
• REScoop: Energy Communities legislation tracker, Greece