Skip to content

Member

Gheorghe CÂRCIU

S&D · Romania

Group
S&D
Country
Romania
Roll-call participation
59.8 %ⓘ of 620 roll calls in office · chamber median 90.6 % · whole term, final votes
With majority line
93.0 %ⓘ of 371 votes where the group had a line · S&D median 97.1 %
More facts (5)
National party
PSD Partidul Social Democrat
In office
Since 16 Jul 2024
Against clear line
23 of 366 votesⓘ
Committees
AGRI, LIBE (substitute)
Member id
257100
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 ⓘ

59.8 %

371 of 620 final votes while in office

S&D median: 89.5 % (−29.7 pts)

Chamber median: 90.6 %

With majority line ⓘ

93.0 %

345 of 371 votes where their group had a line

S&D median: 97.1 % (−4.1 pts)

Against clear line ⓘ

6.3 %

23 of 366 votes where their group had a clear line

19 opposite (for ↔ against), 4 abstained against the line

Abstention ⓘ

1.6 %

6 of 371 votes cast

Participation 59.8 % — S&D median 89.5 %, 137 members.ⓘ
Data as a table
Participation among the 137 members of the S&D with enough votes.
FigureParticipation
Gheorghe CÂRCIU59.8 %
S&D median89.5 %
Lowest in the group48.1 %
Highest in the group99.8 %
Members137
With majority line 93.0 % — S&D median 97.1 %, 137 members.ⓘ
Data as a table
With majority line among the 137 members of the S&D with enough votes.
FigureWith majority line
Gheorghe CÂRCIU93.0 %
S&D median97.1 %
Lowest in the group86.7 %
Highest in the group99.8 %
Members137
  • Whole term, 620 final votes; 620 of 794 decisions had a final vote recorded by name. The dots are the other members of S&D; no ranks.
  • “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.

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: Against Majority line: Against
17 Sept 2026Strengthening global health resilience in partner countries Final vote — text as a wholeAdopted 319 for, 142 against, 19 abstainedPosition: No vote recorded Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For
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: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: For
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: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against Majority line: Against
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: For Majority line: For
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: Against
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: For Majority line: For

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 33 of 80 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

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 S&D

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
Dragoş BENEA S&DRomania99 % of 2 439 shared93 %
Claudiu MANDA S&DRomania99 % of 1 917 shared93 %
Mihai TUDOSE S&DRomania97 % of 2 279 shared93 %
Ştefan MUŞOIU S&DRomania97 % of 3 036 shared93 %
Gabriela FIREA S&DRomania97 % of 2 503 shared93 %
Victor NEGRESCU S&DRomania97 % of 3 127 shared93 %
Andi CRISTEA S&DRomania97 % of 3 133 shared93 %
Dan NICA S&DRomania95 % of 2 318 shared93 %
Vasile DÎNCU S&DRomania95 % of 3 196 shared93 %
Vilija BLINKEVIČIŪTĖ S&DLithuania94 % of 3 225 shared93 %

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
Elisabetta GUALMINI changed group RenewItaly90 % of 801 shared86 %
Dainius ŽALIMAS RenewLithuania88 % of 3 206 shared86 %
Helmut BRANDSTÄTTER RenewAustria87 % of 2 771 shared86 %
Marjan ŠAREC RenewSlovenia87 % of 3 060 shared86 %
Sophie WILMÈS RenewBelgium87 % of 2 204 shared86 %
Charles GOERENS RenewLuxembourg87 % of 3 154 shared86 %
Yvan VEROUGSTRAETE RenewBelgium87 % of 2 524 shared86 %
Dan BARNA RenewRomania87 % of 3 055 shared86 %
Eugen TOMAC RenewRomania87 % of 2 841 shared86 %
Pascal CANFIN RenewFrance86 % of 3 271 shared86 %

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
Committee on Agriculture and Rural DevelopmentAGRI CommitteeMember19 Jul 2024now
Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home AffairsLIBE CommitteeSubstitute19 Jul 2024now
Delegation for Northern cooperation and for relations with Switzerland and Norway and to the EU-Iceland Joint Parliamentary Committee and the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary CommitteeDEEA DelegationVice-chair9 Jul 2025now
Delegation to the Parliamentary Assembly of the Union for the MediterraneanDMED Parliamentary assemblySubstitute19 Sept 2024now
Intergroup on DemographyIG10-09 Intergroup / working groupMember10 Mar 2026now
Intergroup on Sustainable LivestockIG10-15 Intergroup / working groupMember31 Jan 2025now
Intergroup on Wine, Quality Foodstuffs and SpiritsIG10-28 Intergroup / working groupMember23 Jan 2025now
Delegation for Northern cooperation and for relations with Switzerland and Norway and to the EU-Iceland Joint Parliamentary Committee and the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary CommitteeDEEA DelegationMember19 Sept 20248 Jul 2025

Show all 8 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
No dossier namedOfficial delegationAGRI8 Sept 2026
Amending Council Directive 98/58/EC and Directive 2009/128/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council as regards the simplification and strengthening of food and feed safety requirements, and repealing Council Directives 82/711/EEC and 85/572/EECShadow rapporteurAGRI17 Apr 2026
Amending Regulations (EC) No 999/2001, (EC) No 1829/2003, (EC) No 1831/2003, (EC) No 852/2004, (EC) No 853/2004, (EC) No 396/2005, (EC) No 1099/2009, (EC) No 1107/2009, (EU) No 528/2012, (EU) 2017/625 as regards the simplification and strengthening of food and feed safety requirementsShadow rapporteurAGRI17 Apr 2026
No dossier namedOfficial delegationAGRI17 Jul 2025
I would be shadow rapporteur for AGRI decision ”Granting equivalence with EU requirements to Moldova and Ukraine as regards field inspections and production of seed” and I will negotiate on behalf of S &D and Romania's priorities with other political groups.Shadow rapporteurAGRI14 Nov 2024
No dossier namedDelegation vice-chairDEEA26 Sept 2024

Show all 6 dossier roles

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.

No speech or statement in plenary recorded this term.

Questions and motions, 5

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

Show all 5 questions and motions

Amendments tabled in committee, 2

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
22 Jun 2026on general budget of the European Union for the financial year 2027 – all sections AGRI-AM-790051 AGRI14
26 Sept 2025General budget of the European Union for the financial year 2026 - all sections BUDG-AM-778084 BUDG1

Connections

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

Political group

National delegation

  • Delegation Romania 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). “Gheorghe CÂRCIU”. Member record. memberId 257100. EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/members/257100?rows=all&scope=final&vscope=all (retrieved 25 September 2026). Official source: Member’s profile, European Parliament, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/257100. Data: EP Open Data: member record, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/meps/257100?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-257100,
  author = {{EU Parl Watch Research}},
  title = {{Gheorghe CÂRCIU}},
  year = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/members/257100?rows=all&scope=final&vscope=all}},
  url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/members/257100?rows=all&scope=final&vscope=all},
  urldate = {2026-09-25},
  publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
  note = {Member record. memberId 257100. Official source: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meps/en/257100. 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}
}