Skip to content

Members

Every member who served in the 10th term, current and former, with their record in roll-call votes. Each member is counted in the group they belonged to on the day of each vote; members who changed group are marked ⇄.

Filter the members · filtered

2026: 261 final votes with named positions — 261 of 342 decisions had a final vote recorded by name. Chamber median participation 90.8 % (723 members with enough votes). How the figures are computed.

33 members match the filters

Export
What the columns mean

Participationⓘ: roll calls with a recorded vote, of the roll calls while in office. With majority lineⓘ: votes cast the way the plurality of their group voted, of the votes where the group had a line. Against clear lineⓘ: votes otherwise than a line held by at least two thirds of their group with at least 10 members voting, of the votes where it had one. Abstentionⓘ: of the votes cast. ± group: difference from the median of the member’s group (the one they held for most of the period), in percentage points; not compared for a member who changed group in the period; the non-attached have no group line. Each member is counted in the group they belonged to on the day of each vote; a figure over fewer than 50 votes is shown as a count.

Participationⓘ: roll calls with a recorded vote, of the roll calls while in office. With majority lineⓘ: votes cast the way the plurality of their group voted, of the votes where the group had a line. Against clear lineⓘ: votes otherwise than a line held by at least two thirds of their group with at least 10 members voting, of the votes where it had one. Abstentionⓘ: of the votes cast. ± group: difference from the median of the member’s group (the one they held for most of the period), in percentage points; not compared for a member who changed group in the period; the non-attached have no group line. Each member is counted in the group they belonged to on the day of each vote; a figure over fewer than 50 votes is shown as a count.

Members’ voting records
SelectMember, sort Z to ACountry, sort A to ZGroup, sort A to ZParticipation, sort highest first± groupWith majority line, sort highest first± groupAgainst clear line, sort highest first Abstention, sort highest first
Anja HAZEKAMP NetherlandsThe Left90.8 % of 261+3.8 pts median 87.0 %79.1 % of 234−6.1 pts median 85.2 %18.0 % of 18913.9 % of 237
Anna STROLENBERG NetherlandsGreens98.5 % of 261+5.9 pts median 92.5 %95.7 % of 257+0.5 pts median 95.3 %3.3 % of 2465.8 % of 257
Anouk VAN BRUG NetherlandsRenew98.1 % of 261+5.7 pts median 92.3 %87.5 % of 255−5.7 pts median 93.1 %9.8 % of 2353.1 % of 256
Auke ZIJLSTRA NetherlandsPatriots95.4 % of 261+6.1 pts median 89.3 %74.2 % of 248−4.7 pts median 78.9 %14.2 % of 1909.6 % of 249
Bart GROOTHUIS NetherlandsRenew78.9 % of 261−13.4 pts median 92.3 %89.3 % of 206−3.8 pts median 93.1 %6.5 % of 1861.9 % of 206
Bert-Jan RUISSEN NetherlandsECR99.6 % of 261+6.9 pts median 92.7 %79.5 % of 259−6.3 pts median 85.8 %15.7 % of 21619.2 % of 260
Brigitte VAN DEN BERG NetherlandsRenew84.3 % of 261−8.0 pts median 92.3 %95.0 % of 219+1.9 pts median 93.1 %1.5 % of 2040.9 % of 220
Catarina VIEIRA NetherlandsGreens79.7 % of 261−12.8 pts median 92.5 %95.7 % of 208+0.4 pts median 95.3 %3.5 % of 2007.7 % of 208
Dirk GOTINK NetherlandsEPP96.6 % of 261+5.4 pts median 91.2 %96.4 % of 252+1.5 pts median 94.9 %3.3 % of 2392.0 % of 252
Gerben-Jan GERBRANDY NetherlandsRenew99.2 % of 261+6.9 pts median 92.3 %95.0 % of 258+1.8 pts median 93.1 %1.3 % of 2380.8 % of 259
Ingeborg TER LAAK NetherlandsEPP99.2 % of 261+8.0 pts median 91.2 %97.3 % of 259+2.4 pts median 94.9 %2.4 % of 2451.5 % of 259
Jeannette BALJEU NetherlandsRenew83.5 % of 261−8.8 pts median 92.3 %89.4 % of 217−3.7 pts median 93.1 %6.6 % of 1971.8 % of 218
Jeroen LENAERS NetherlandsEPP100.0 % of 261+8.8 pts median 91.2 %97.7 % of 261+2.8 pts median 94.9 %2.0 % of 2471.5 % of 261
Jessika VAN LEEUWEN changed group Changed group in this period: not compared with a single group’s median.NetherlandsECR96.9 % of 261not compared median 92.7 %75.4 % of 252not compared median 85.8 %22.2 % of 21225.3 % of 253
Kim VAN SPARRENTAK NetherlandsGreens82.4 % of 261−10.2 pts median 92.5 %95.3 % of 215+0.1 pts median 95.3 %3.4 % of 2077.0 % of 215
Lara WOLTERS NetherlandsS&D98.9 % of 261+8.8 pts median 90.0 %93.4 % of 258−4.0 pts median 97.4 %5.9 % of 2564.3 % of 258
Malik AZMANI NetherlandsRenew98.1 % of 261+5.7 pts median 92.3 %87.8 % of 255−5.3 pts median 93.1 %8.5 % of 2343.9 % of 256
Marieke EHLERS NetherlandsPatriots98.5 % of 261+9.2 pts median 89.3 %73.8 % of 256−5.0 pts median 78.9 %14.4 % of 19410.1 % of 257
Marit MAIJ NetherlandsS&D99.2 % of 261+9.2 pts median 90.0 %91.9 % of 259−5.5 pts median 97.4 %7.4 % of 2575.0 % of 259
Mieke ANDRIESE NetherlandsPatriots95.0 % of 261+5.7 pts median 89.3 %74.1 % of 247−4.8 pts median 78.9 %14.7 % of 19110.1 % of 248
Mohammed CHAHIM NetherlandsS&D81.2 % of 261−8.8 pts median 90.0 %94.8 % of 212−2.6 pts median 97.4 %4.7 % of 2113.8 % of 212
Rachel BLOM NetherlandsPatriots99.6 % of 261+10.3 pts median 89.3 %74.1 % of 259−4.7 pts median 78.9 %14.2 % of 19710.0 % of 260
Raquel GARCÍA HERMIDA-VAN DER WALLE NetherlandsRenew99.6 % of 261+7.3 pts median 92.3 %94.6 % of 259+1.5 pts median 93.1 %1.7 % of 2380.8 % of 260
Reinier VAN LANSCHOT NetherlandsGreens97.3 % of 261+4.8 pts median 92.5 %95.7 % of 254+0.4 pts median 95.3 %2.9 % of 2435.5 % of 254
Sander SMIT changed group Changed group in this period: not compared with a single group’s median.NetherlandsECR94.6 % of 261not compared median 92.7 %74.8 % of 246not compared median 85.8 %22.6 % of 20825.1 % of 247
Sebastian KRUIS NetherlandsPatriots88.1 % of 261−1.1 pts median 89.3 %73.8 % of 229−5.1 pts median 78.9 %14.2 % of 1769.6 % of 230
Thijs REUTEN NetherlandsS&D96.9 % of 261+6.9 pts median 90.0 %92.9 % of 253−4.5 pts median 97.4 %6.4 % of 2514.3 % of 253
Tineke STRIK NetherlandsGreens83.5 % of 261−9.0 pts median 92.5 %95.9 % of 218+0.6 pts median 95.3 %2.8 % of 2117.3 % of 218
Ton DIEPEVEEN NetherlandsPatriots95.8 % of 261+6.5 pts median 89.3 %73.1 % of 249−5.8 pts median 78.9 %14.7 % of 1909.6 % of 250
Ufuk KÂHYA NetherlandsGreens98.6 % of 72+6.1 pts median 92.5 %95.8 % of 71+0.5 pts median 95.3 %2.9 % of 698.5 % of 71
Willemien KONING NetherlandsEPP95.3 % of 212+4.1 pts median 91.2 %97.0 % of 202+2.1 pts median 94.9 %2.6 % of 1942.0 % of 202
Bas EICKHOUT Left on 20 Jun 2026 NetherlandsGreens75.1 % of 189−17.4 pts median 92.5 %99.3 % of 142+4.0 pts median 95.3 %0.0 % of 1384.2 % of 142
Tom BERENDSEN Left on 22 Feb 2026 NetherlandsEPP48 of 48 — median 91.2 %48 of 48 — median 94.9 %0 of 42 0 of 48
  • “No vote recorded” is not the same as absent: leave, illness and chairing the sitting look the same. The President does not vote.
  • A group’s line is inferred from its members’ votes — Parliament publishes no whip. Non-attached members have no group line.
  • Roll calls are not a random sample: final votes on laws are recorded by name, most other roll calls because a group asked for it.
  • Positions are as recorded; later corrections of voting intention are not applied.