Today the European Parliament voted in favour of the report on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing the Erasmus+ programme for the period 2028-2034 with 454 votes in favour, 34 against and 93 abstentions.
However, as MEPs debate and vote on the future of Erasmus+, the battle is about more than simply student exchanges, it is about money, equal access and how the EU invests in its next generation.
The debate concerns the next Erasmus+ programme for 2028–2034, which will replace the current framework and incorporate activities currently run through the European Solidarity Corps. Parliament’s position will help shape negotiations with EU governments over the bloc’s next long-term budget.
What is Erasmus+, and why does it matter?
Erasmus+ supports education, vocational training, youth exchanges, sport and learning mobility. It allows students to study in another country, supports cooperation between educational institutions and gives young people opportunities to develop skills, meet different communities and gain international experience.
Its reach extends beyond university students as it also includes school pupils, apprentices, educators, youth organisations and people taking part in volunteering activities.
For young Europeans, the programme can mean better language skills, professional contacts and greater independence. For the European Union, it is also a tool for building cooperation across borders and strengthening a shared European identity. The debate, however, is about more than the size of the budget. It is also about whether the programme can keep pace with the needs of the people it serves.
“As the programme evolves, we must ensure that it remains accessible, simple to navigate and responsive to the needs of young people, students, school pupils, teachers and organisations across Europe and beyond,” said rapporteur Bogdan Zdrojewski, a Polish MEP from the European People’s Party (EPP).
His remarks during Wednesday’s press conference in Strasbourg pointed to three central questions in the negotiations: whether Erasmus+ will receive enough funding, whether its opportunities will reach more people, and whether participation can be made simpler for students and organisations.
The next programme will coincide with Erasmus+’s 40th anniversary in 2027, making the negotiations a significant moment for one of the EU’s flagship initiatives.
Why Cyprus should be watching
MEP Loucas Fourlas has called for increased Erasmus+ funding to translate into tangible opportunities for young people in Cyprus, arguing that a bigger budget must mean more than simply additional money.
Speaking to en.philenews, Fourlas said the European People’s Party (EPP) had “long pushed for the programme’s budget to double to €47.4 billion.” He stressed that “more funding should enable more young Cypriots to study, train and volunteer abroad.”
Fourlas also highlighted the financial barriers that can prevent young people from participating, calling for “stronger support to cover flights, accommodation and daily living costs, particularly for those from lower-income families.” He also advocated simpler application procedures.
For Cyprus, the stakes extend beyond the number of students who can study abroad. As an island on the EU’s geographical periphery, the cost of travelling to other European countries can add to the financial burden of participating in international exchanges.
Better-targeted grants could therefore make a practical difference to who gets to benefit from Erasmus+.
The programme could also help Cypriot universities, schools and vocational training providers deepen their links with European partners, giving young people access to new learning experiences and skills that may improve their employment prospects. For smaller youth organisations, simpler funding procedures could make it easier to organise exchanges and reach participants who are often underrepresented.
Beyond individual exchanges, Fourlas emphasised the importance of supporting Cypriot schools, universities and youth organisations through more European partnerships and mobility programmes. These, he argued, “can help young people develop skills suited to the modern labour market.”
However, a larger EU budget alone will not guarantee these outcomes. The level of individual grants, eligibility criteria and support for participants with fewer opportunities will be crucial. For Cyprus, the test will be whether the next Erasmus+ programme expands access beyond those who already have the financial means and institutional support to participate.
The money question: How ambitious should Europe be?
The European Commission has proposed €40.8 billion in current prices for Erasmus+ over 2028–2034, combining the programme with the European Solidarity Corps. That represents an increase of around 49% compared with the combined funding of the two existing programmes.
Parliament’s Culture and Education Committee has called for a further increase, proposing €47.38 billion.
A larger budget could give the programme greater capacity to support participants, institutions and youth organisations. But Erasmus+ is also part of a much wider negotiation over the EU’s next seven-year budget, where education and youth funding compete with other spending priorities.
The question for MEPs is whether the proposed expansion is enough to meet demand or whether the EU risks promising more opportunities without providing sufficient resources to deliver them.
Beyond the headline figure: Who gets access?
Beyond funding, accessibility also rises as a key proponent of the recent debates as studying or training abroad can involve travel, accommodation and living expenses that grants do not always fully cover. These costs can be especially challenging for young people from lower-income households or countries where travel to other parts of Europe is expensive.
Parliament’s Education Committee has called for financial support that reflects differences in living and housing costs between host countries. It has also proposed a target that at least 20% of mobility participants should be people with fewer opportunities.
This raises a central policy question: should Erasmus+ primarily support those already well placed to take advantage of international opportunities, or should it do more to reach people who face financial, social or geographical barriers?
One programme, two identities?
The proposed integration of the European Solidarity Corps into Erasmus+ introduces another important debate.
The Commission argues that bringing programmes together can simplify the EU’s funding system and create greater efficiency. The European Solidarity Corps, however, has a distinct purpose: supporting volunteering and solidarity activities, including humanitarian volunteering.
Parliament’s Education Committee wants these opportunities to retain their visibility and accessibility within the larger programme.
The proposed budget allocation reflects that tension exists. The committee’s report assigns 74.6% to education and training, 15% to youth and volunteering, and 4.1% to sport.
(Sources: European Parliament, European Commission)
Read more:
