Skip to content

Member

Branko GRIMS

No group · Slovenia

Group
No group NI Changed group: EPP 16 Jul 2024 – 8 Jul 2026 → No group since 9 Jul 2026
Country
Slovenia
Roll-call participation
91.6 %ⓘ of 5 928 roll calls in office · chamber median 90.2 % · whole term, roll calls Changed group in this period: not compared with a single group’s median.
With majority line
70.2 %ⓘ of 5 006 votes where the group had a line · compared per group under Record
More facts (4)
National party
SDS Slovenska demokratska stranka
In office
Since 16 Jul 2024
Against clear line
1 308 of 4 752 votesⓘ
Member id
220908
More

Record

The member’s figures against the median of their group and of the chamber. Each vote counts the member in the group they belonged to that day.

Roll-call participation ⓘ

91.6 %

5 429 of 5 928 roll calls while in office

Chamber median: 90.2 %

With majority line ⓘ

70.2 %

3 513 of 5 006 votes where their group had a line

Against clear line ⓘ

27.5 %

1 308 of 4 752 votes where their group had a clear line

947 opposite (for ↔ against), 343 abstained against the line, 18 voted for or against when the line was to abstain

Abstention ⓘ

7.4 %

401 of 5 429 votes cast

Compared with each group they sat in

The member’s record in each group they sat in during the period, over the roll calls held while they sat in it (dates: the first and last of them). Each figure with its denominator: participation of the roll calls held, majority line of the votes where the group had one, against clear line of the votes where it had a clear line (at least two thirds, with at least 10 members voting), abstention of the votes cast. Median: that group’s median over the same roll calls, with the member’s difference in percentage points. A figure over fewer than 50 votes is shown as a count.
GroupParticipationWith majority lineAgainst clear lineAbstention
EPP 17 Jul 2024 – 8 Jul 202691.0 % of 5 501 median 89.8 % (+1.2 pts)70.2 % of 5 006 median 93.8 % (−23.6 pts)27.5 % of 4 7527.1 % of 5 006
No group 9 Jul 2026 – 17 Sept 202699.1 % of 427 median 97.2 %no group lineno group line10.4 % of 423
  • Whole term, 5 928 roll-call votes.
  • “No vote recorded” is not the same as absent: leave, illness and chairing the sitting look the same.
  • A group’s line is inferred from its members’ votes — Parliament publishes no whip.
  • This member changed group in this period: each vote counts them in the group of that day, and they are compared with each group over the roll calls held while they sat in it — not with one group’s median.

Votes, 5 928

Export

Every roll-call vote of the term with the member’s position, newest first.

Result: for–against–abstained. Majority line: how most of the member’s group voted that day (“Tie” when no position won). ≠ group marks a vote otherwise than a clear line (at least two thirds, with at least 10 members voting) of their group.
DateDecision and voteResultPositionMajority line
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Final vote — text as a wholeAdopted 339 for, 225 against, 16 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026Strengthening global health resilience in partner countries Final vote — text as a wholeAdopted 319 for, 142 against, 19 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 73, adding text after recital H 181 for, 399 against, 2 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 16, adding text after recital G 252 for, 326 against, 8 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Recital F — part 3 381 for, 190 against, 4 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Recital F — part 2 338 for, 233 against, 9 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Recital F — part 1 524 for, 48 against, 5 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 58 to recital E 84 for, 484 against, 8 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 57, adding text after recital D 193 for, 389 against, 4 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 56 to recital D 89 for, 494 against, 3 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendments 14 + 59 (voted as one), adding text after recital C 204 for, 381 against, 9 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 61, adding text after recital C 215 for, 366 against, 7 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 60, adding text after recital C 209 for, 378 against, 6 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 55 to recital C 95 for, 486 against, 11 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 72, adding text after recital B 345 for, 242 against, 5 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Separate vote on recital A 459 for, 120 against, 10 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 42, adding text after citation 5 439 for, 128 against, 30 abstainedPosition: Abstained Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 40, adding text after citation 1 392 for, 132 against, 62 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 79, adding text after paragraph 15 448 for, 137 against, 5 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 1, adding text after paragraph 14 — part 2 297 for, 267 against, 21 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 1, adding text after paragraph 14 — part 1 304 for, 268 against, 21 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 71 to paragraph 14 92 for, 496 against, 6 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 77, adding text after paragraph 13 330 for, 250 against, 16 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 70, adding text after paragraph 13 93 for, 493 against, 5 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 39, adding text after paragraph 13 257 for, 331 against, 7 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Paragraph 13 — part 2 351 for, 232 against, 3 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 69 to paragraph 13 195 for, 392 against, 6 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 53, adding text after paragraph 12 390 for, 143 against, 64 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Paragraph 12 — part 4 441 for, 147 against, 7 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Paragraph 12 — part 3 427 for, 166 against, 7 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 36 to paragraph 12 231 for, 355 against, 12 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 34, adding text after paragraph 11 261 for, 335 against, 4 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 52 to paragraph 11 259 for, 336 against, 7 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 10 to paragraph 11 208 for, 382 against, 5 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 68 to paragraph 11 235 for, 358 against, 9 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 51, adding text after paragraph 10 277 for, 321 against, 5 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Paragraph 10 — part 3 353 for, 240 against, 5 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Paragraph 10 — part 2 363 for, 231 against, 7 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Paragraph 10 — part 1 390 for, 205 against, 4 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 67, adding text after paragraph 9 203 for, 392 against, 5 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 6, adding text after paragraph 9 266 for, 295 against, 37 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 50, adding text after paragraph 8 215 for, 335 against, 54 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 48 to paragraph 8 261 for, 316 against, 27 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 78, adding text after paragraph 7 395 for, 204 against, 5 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 76, adding text after paragraph 7 177 for, 418 against, 13 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 66, adding text after paragraph 7 204 for, 395 against, 5 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 5, adding text after paragraph 7 202 for, 380 against, 18 abstainedPosition: For Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 30 to paragraph 7 253 for, 329 against, 22 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 65 to paragraph 7 91 for, 503 against, 9 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —
17 Sept 2026The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external borders Amendment 29 to paragraph 6 261 for, 340 against, 6 abstainedPosition: Against Majority line: —

Roll-call participation

One cell per sitting while in office, shaded by the share of that day’s roll calls the member voted in. The official attendance register is kept separately by Parliament.

No vote recorded on 15 of 107 sittings with roll calls.

"No vote recorded" is not the same as absent: leave, illness and chairing the sitting look the same.

Data as a table
Roll calls held at each sitting while in office and how many of them the member voted in.
SittingRoll callsVoted in
17 Jul 2024233
18 Jul 202410
16 Sept 202422
18 Sept 202422
19 Sept 20249288
7 Oct 202422
8 Oct 202411
9 Oct 20241818
10 Oct 202444
21 Oct 202422
22 Oct 20241010
23 Oct 2024129127
24 Oct 2024130
13 Nov 202422
14 Nov 20243636
25 Nov 202422
26 Nov 20241818
27 Nov 20241111
28 Nov 20245757
17 Dec 20241313
18 Dec 20243332
19 Dec 20244545
20 Jan 202520
21 Jan 202510
22 Jan 202520
23 Jan 20254544
10 Feb 202511
11 Feb 20253232
12 Feb 20251010
13 Feb 20253029
10 Mar 202522
11 Mar 202599
12 Mar 2025228225
13 Mar 20252424
31 Mar 202530
1 Apr 2025350
2 Apr 2025251251
3 Apr 20256262
5 May 202555
6 May 20251010
7 May 2025220219
8 May 20251030
21 May 202522
22 May 20255352
16 Jun 202522
17 Jun 20254141
18 Jun 20259191
19 Jun 20258787
7 Jul 202511
8 Jul 20255555
9 Jul 2025134134
10 Jul 2025360
8 Sept 202511
9 Sept 2025101101
10 Sept 20253434
11 Sept 20256969
6 Oct 202522
7 Oct 202555
8 Oct 20255555
9 Oct 20256563
20 Oct 202533
21 Oct 20251313
22 Oct 2025186186
23 Oct 20255555
13 Nov 2025267265
24 Nov 202533
25 Nov 20257575
26 Nov 202510098
27 Nov 2025125124
15 Dec 202544
16 Dec 20256666
17 Dec 20254343
18 Dec 20254242
20 Jan 20266767
21 Jan 2026112112
22 Jan 20265857
9 Feb 202622
10 Feb 20263838
11 Feb 20261313
12 Feb 2026141141
24 Feb 20264343
9 Mar 202611
10 Mar 2026197197
11 Mar 20266060
12 Mar 20263433
25 Mar 202633
26 Mar 20266969
27 Apr 202622
28 Apr 2026225224
29 Apr 2026296296
30 Apr 20266867
18 May 202640
19 May 202633
20 May 20269696
21 May 20269898
15 Jun 202620
16 Jun 2026400
17 Jun 20261270
18 Jun 2026770
6 Jul 202620
7 Jul 20267271
8 Jul 2026144143
9 Jul 20266764
14 Sept 202611
15 Sept 2026155155
16 Sept 20268079
17 Sept 2026124124

Voting neighbours

Members who voted the same way most often in the roll calls they both took part in, within and outside the member’s group (group at the date of each vote), over all roll calls of the term.

At least 200 shared roll calls over at least six months in office together. Within = both sat in the same group on the date of the vote; a member who changed group can appear on both lists. Baseline = the median agreement of all pairs of members of the groups the two sat in on the date of each shared vote (within: the group they shared; outside: the two groups), weighted by the votes they shared in each combination.

Within the same group (on the day of each vote)

Agreement: roll calls where both cast the same position, of the roll calls both voted in while in the same group (“shared”); a count below 50 shared. Baseline: the median agreement of every pair of members of that group.
SelectMemberGroupCountryAgreementBaseline
Zala ČERNILEC TOMAŠIČ EPPSlovenia84 % of 4 896 shared89 %
Milan ZVER EPPSlovenia83 % of 4 622 shared89 %
Romana TOMC EPPSlovenia81 % of 4 850 shared89 %
Davor Ivo STIER EPPCroatia76 % of 4 173 shared89 %
Matej TONIN EPPSlovenia76 % of 4 969 shared89 %
Tomislav SOKOL EPPCroatia75 % of 4 679 shared89 %
Fulvio MARTUSCIELLO EPPItaly74 % of 2 288 shared89 %
Željana ZOVKO EPPCroatia74 % of 4 063 shared89 %
Alma EZCURRA ALMANSA EPPSpain74 % of 1 294 shared89 %
Eszter LAKOS EPPHungary74 % of 2 770 shared89 %

Show all 10 neighbours

Outside the group

Agreement: roll calls where both cast the same position, of the roll calls both voted in while in different groups (“shared”); a count below 50 shared. Baseline: the median agreement of every pair of members of the groups the two sat in on those votes (groups at the date, weighted by the votes shared in each combination).
SelectMemberGroupCountryAgreementBaseline
Aurelijus VERYGA ECRLithuania73 % of 4 970 shared50 %
Stephen Nikola BARTULICA ECRCroatia72 % of 4 500 shared50 %
Mario MANTOVANI ECRItaly72 % of 3 844 shared50 %
Jaak MADISON ECREstonia72 % of 4 530 shared50 %
Alessandro CIRIANI ECRItaly71 % of 4 698 shared50 %
Ruggero RAZZA ECRItaly71 % of 4 189 shared50 %
Antonella SBERNA ECRItaly71 % of 4 679 shared50 %
Alberico GAMBINO ECRItaly71 % of 4 033 shared50 %
Carlo CICCIOLI ECRItaly71 % of 4 551 shared50 %
Nicola PROCACCINI ECRItaly71 % of 4 651 shared50 %

Show all 10 neighbours

Work

Seats in committees, delegations and intergroups, and the dossiers the member leads, shadows or negotiates.

Seats

Body: the committee, delegation or intergroup, with its kind. Role: the member’s role in it. From, To: the dates of the seat (“now” while it lasts).
BodyRoleFromTo
Intergroup on DemographyIG10-09 Intergroup / working groupMember27 Jan 2025now
Intergroup on Traditional Minorities, National Communities and LanguagesIG10-25 Intergroup / working groupMember29 Jan 2025now
Committee on Constitutional AffairsAFCO CommitteeSubstitute19 Jul 20248 Jul 2026
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home AffairsLIBE CommitteeMember19 Jul 20248 Jul 2026
Delegation to the EU-UK Parliamentary Partnership AssemblyD-UK Joint parliamentary committeeSubstitute19 Sept 20248 Jul 2026
Delegation to the OACPS-EU Joint Parliamentary AssemblyDACP Parliamentary assemblyMember19 Sept 20248 Jul 2026
Delegation to the Caribbean-EU Parliamentary AssemblyDCAB Parliamentary assemblyMember19 Sept 20248 Jul 2026

Show all 7 seats

Dossiers

Dossier: the procedure the declaration names (“No dossier named” for a delegation without one). Role: rapporteur, shadow rapporteur, negotiator or delegation. Committee: the committee that appointed them. Date: of the declaration.
DossierRoleCommitteeDate
Application of the Treaty provisions related to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and the role of national parliaments in the EU legislative processShadow rapporteurAFCO22 Oct 2025

Topics they work on (model-assigned)

Counts: dossiers they spoke on, led or amended, and their questions and motions.

In the chamber

Speeches and statements in plenary debates, newest first; the verbatim report is on Parliament’s site.

18 contributions recorded; 20 minutes of speaking time.

Date: the sitting. Debate: the item debated, and the group when they spoke on its behalf. Kind: speech or written statement, with speaking time. Verbatim: the verbatim report on Parliament’s site.
DateDebateKindVerbatim
27 Apr 2026One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
25 Mar 2026One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
9 Mar 2026One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
9 Feb 2026One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
19 Jan 2026One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
15 Dec 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
24 Nov 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
12 Nov 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
20 Oct 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
6 Oct 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
8 Sept 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
16 Jun 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
21 May 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
5 May 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
10 Mar 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
10 Feb 2025One-minute speeches on matters of political importance Speech · 1 minRead
9 Oct 2024Presentation of the programme of activities of the Hungarian Presidency (debate) Speech · 1 minRead
16 Sept 2024Need to prevent security threats like the Solingen attack through addressing illegal migration and effective return (debate) Speech · 1 minRead

Questions and motions, 63

Parliamentary questions and motions for resolutions the member authored or co-signed, newest first.

Date: tabled. Title: the question or motion, with its id. Kind: written question or motion for a resolution, with the number of co-authors. Answer: the date of the answer to a question.
DateTitleKindAnswer
27 Aug 2026The EU’s deadly anti-racism ideology: the death of Henry Nowak E-10-2026-003350Written questionwith 22 co-authorsNot yet answered
31 Jul 2026MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on the need to combat migrant grooming gangs B-10-2026-0373Motion for a resolutionwith 80 co-authors—
21 Apr 2026Selective penalisation of religious expression in European football and consistency with EU fundamental rights E-10-2026-001627Written questionwith 20 co-authors1 Jul 2026
16 Apr 2026Antifa=Terrorists: zero tolerance for political violence in Europe E-10-2026-001569Written questionwith 28 co-authors15 Jun 2026
15 Apr 2026MOTION FOR A RESOLUTION on EU-funded media attacking Christian symbols while applying double standards B-10-2026-0184Motion for a resolutionwith 27 co-authors—
10 Apr 2026EU budget and equality policy – promoting LGBTQ projects over family policy E-10-2026-001469Written questionwith 22 co-authors30 Jun 2026
8 Apr 2026Union Resettlement and Humanitarian Admission Framework Regulation E-10-2026-001410Written questionwith 25 co-authors18 Jun 2026
8 Apr 2026De facto mandatory nature of the codes of conduct on disinformation and hate speech E-10-2026-001432Written questionwith 23 co-authors15 Jun 2026
20 Mar 2026Does the Commission intend to address electoral procedures, such as rules governing early voting, in its future reports on the rule of law in Slovenia? E-10-2026-001170Written question5 Jun 2026
5 Mar 2026Anti-fascist movements and political violence – the real threat to democracy E-10-2026-000925Written questionwith 62 co-authors29 Apr 2026

Show all 63 questions and motions

Amendments tabled in committee, 1

Committee amendment documents that carry amendments by the member, with how many are theirs.

Date: of the amendment document. Text amended: the dossier and the document’s id. Committee: where the amendments were tabled. Amendments: how many in the document are the member’s.
DateText amendedCommitteeAmendments
5 Jun 2025Application of the Treaty provisions related to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and the role of national parliaments in the EU legislative process AFCO-AM-774332 AFCO22

Connections

Dossiers they lead or shadow, committees, party, delegation and other related pages.

Political groups this term

National delegation

  • Delegation Slovenia National delegation

Sources & citation

Where the facts on this page come from, and how to cite it.

Data source
Licensed CC BY 4.0.
Data version
data version f37e5638cded (25 Sept 2026) · methods: group-at-date v1, participation v1, abstention v1, loyalty v1, against-clear v1, cohesion v1, agreement v1, group-agreement v1, winning-side v1, similar-votes v1, scope v1, data-version v1 · methods
Retrieved
25 September 2026

Cite as

EU Parl Watch Research (2026). “Branko GRIMS”. Member record. memberId 220908. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/members/220908?rows=all&speeches=all&vscope=all (retrieved 25 September 2026). Official source: Member’s profile, European Parliament, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/220908. Data: EP Open Data: member record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/meps/220908?format=application%2Fld%2Bjson (CC BY 4.0); data version f37e5638cded (25 Sept 2026) · methods: group-at-date v1, participation v1, abstention v1, loyalty v1, against-clear v1, cohesion v1, agreement v1, group-agreement v1, winning-side v1, similar-votes v1, scope v1, data-version v1.
BibTeX
@misc{epw-member-220908,
  author = {{EU Parl Watch Research}},
  title = {{Branko GRIMS}},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/members/220908?rows=all&speeches=all&vscope=all}},
  url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/members/220908?rows=all&speeches=all&vscope=all},
  urldate = {2026-09-25},
  publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
  note = {Member record. memberId 220908. Official source: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/220908. Data: EP Open Data: member record (CC BY 4.0); data version f37e5638cded (25 Sept 2026) · methods: group-at-date v1, participation v1, abstention v1, loyalty v1, against-clear v1, cohesion v1, agreement v1, group-agreement v1, winning-side v1, similar-votes v1, scope v1, data-version v1}
}