One of the European Union’s flagship initiatives for the digital transition is the Digital Europe Programme, which aims to strengthen Member States’ technological capacities and support the development of artificial intelligence, cybersecurity, and digital skills. Within this programme, however, there exists a less visible yet strategically significant pillar: the Safer Internet Centres (SICs), which serve the protection of children online. These centres operate hotlines, helplines, and educational programmes, and over the past fifteen years have become a key institutional pillar of child protection across Europe.
The most recent funding round has created a significant disruption in this system. Fifteen Member States – including Hungary – were not awarded funding and have been placed on a reserve list, creating not only operational uncertainty but also systemic risk. As a result, approximately 185 million EU citizens are currently deprived of this effective European mechanism for online child protection. This is particularly alarming in light of the fact that INHOPE – the international network of hotlines – has reported a year-on-year increase in online child sexual abuse material. These reports show not only a growing number of cases, but also rising levels of brutality and organisation, making prevention and rapid intervention more urgent than ever.
The parameters of the 2025 SIC call themselves reveal the structural tension built into the system. In simplified terms, the call allowed for the financing of only one Safer Internet Centre per country, with project durations of 36 months. Individual projects could request between EUR 300,000 and EUR 3.7 million in funding. Moreover, the call was open not only to EU Member States but also to countries associated with the Digital Europe Programme. This meant that the geographic and institutional scope was wide, project duration long-term, and maximum grant amounts substantial. Against this background, with an overall envelope of roughly EUR 42 million, it was almost inevitable that not all applicants meeting the quality threshold could be funded.
However, this is only part of the picture. Within the Digital Europe Programme, new policy priorities have emerged which have significantly reshaped the distribution of resources. Measures to combat disinformation, strengthen fact-checking capacity, and initiatives such as the European Democracy Shield have gained increasing prominence. While these objectives are important, available evidence suggests that funding for these priorities has been delivered partly at the expense of child protection-focused programmes. In this sense, the Safer Internet Centres have not simply fallen victim to a tight budgetary envelope; they appear to have been affected by a clear shift in priorities.
Against this backdrop, the apparent reallocation of resources affecting precisely this policy area is particularly difficult to justify. Although informal indications suggest that a new call for proposals may be published in the near future, current signals point to a shorter funding period and a smaller overall budget. This approach not only undermines long-term planning but also jeopardises the sustainability of professional capacity, as SICs are not project-based initiatives but ongoing services requiring continuous operation.
The gravity of the situation is further exacerbated by last week’s vote in the European Parliament, which rejected the extension of the temporary derogation that had allowed online service providers to voluntarily detect and report child sexual abuse material. Although temporary in nature, this framework had served as an essential safeguard in a period when comprehensive EU legislation had not yet been adopted. As a result of this decision, a legal gap may emerge in which neither platforms nor public authorities possess clear authorisation to act effectively.
Taken together, the combined impact of reduced funding and the weakening of the regulatory framework reveals a worrying policy trajectory. The European Union is simultaneously reducing operational capacity and loosening the legal framework in an area where risks are clearly increasing. This is not only a policy contradiction, but also a serious credibility challenge.
The role of Safer Internet Centres extends far beyond responding to incidents after they occur. They play a crucial role in prevention, education, and awareness-raising. Through their programmes, millions of children receive guidance on how to navigate the online environment safely, recognise risks, and seek help when needed. They also provide indispensable support to parents and educators – a critical function in a digital environment that evolves faster than society’s ability to adapt.
The current reallocation of resources therefore constitutes not merely a financial adjustment but a strategic choice regarding the priorities of the European Union’s digital policy. While substantial resources are directed towards technological innovation, competitiveness, and industrial development, the social dimension – particularly the protection of the most vulnerable – appears to be receding.
This trend is especially problematic in the current political context. The recent vote in the European Parliament has already attracted significant criticism, with many arguing that child protection considerations were not given sufficient weight. This concern is now compounded by funding uncertainty, reinforcing the perception that the European Union is not consistently upholding its declared values in this field.
From a policy perspective, the solution is clear: stable, multiannual funding must be secured for Safer Internet Centres, alongside the adoption of a coherent EU-wide regulatory framework that provides clear legal authority for digital platforms and authorities to protect children online. At the same time, Member States’ capacities must be strengthened, and international cooperation further deepened.
The experience of INHOPE clearly demonstrates that the problem is transnational and can only be addressed through coordinated action. It is therefore particularly unjustified that certain Member States should be entirely excluded from funding, as this not only weakens national systems but also undermines the European response as a whole.
In conclusion, the current situation serves as a warning that digital policy cannot be divorced from social responsibility. Technological progress is not an end in itself, but a means – and without appropriate safeguards, it risks endangering precisely those it should protect. The European Union must therefore reassess its priorities and ensure that child protection is reflected not only in rhetoric but also in concrete budgetary and regulatory decisions.
The original article on the Euractiv website: Safeguarding Children in Europe’s Digital Transition: The Funding Gap of Safer Internet Centres | Euractiv
By Bernadett Petri, the managing director of MFOI
