Skip to content
EU Parl WatchResearch
Projects

Vote · Roll call

Paragraph 1, point ae — part 2

Recommendation to the Council on the EU priorities for the 69th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women

Vote
Paragraph 1, point ae — part 2
Decision
No. 5 of the sitting of 19 Dec 2024
Result
264 for · 292 against · 5 abstained Rejected · roll call
Date
19 December 2024, 12:16
More facts (6)
Position
vote 23 of 46 on the decision
Requested by
roll call: Greens, Patriots, ECR · split vote: EPP
Official label
A10–0030/2024 – Lina Gálvez – § 1, point ae/2
Text
Report A-10-2024-0030
Dossier
2024/2057(INI)
Vote id
171324
More
Cite this page

The members file includes members in office who did not vote.

Roll-call results (EP) (opens the official site)
Link to this page

Result

The vote as recorded by name.

Result: 264 for, 292 against, 5 abstained (roll call).

Rejected · 47 % of the votes cast were for.

Part voted on: “those words”

Groups

Members' votes, each counted in the group they belonged to on the day. No vote: in office that day, no position recorded. Majority line: the most common position. Clear line: a position with at least two thirds of the group's votes (at least 10 members voting), otherwise Divided. Cohesion: Agreement Index, 0 = evenly split, 1 = all voted the same (method).
GroupForAgainstAbst.No voteMajority lineClear lineCohesionBar
The LeftFor 40Against 0Abst. 0No vote 6 of 46Majority line ForClear line For Cohesion 1.00
GreensFor 44Against 0Abst. 0No vote 9 of 53Majority line ForClear line For Cohesion 1.00
S&DFor 103Against 3Abst. 0No vote 30 of 136Majority line ForClear line For Cohesion 0.96
RenewFor 59Against 4Abst. 0No vote 14 of 77Majority line ForClear line For Cohesion 0.90
EPPFor 7Against 127Abst. 0No vote 54 of 188Majority line AgainstClear line Against Cohesion 0.92
ECRFor 0Against 61Abst. 0No vote 19 of 80Majority line AgainstClear line Against Cohesion 1.00
PatriotsFor 0Against 68Abst. 0No vote 18 of 86Majority line AgainstClear line Against Cohesion 1.00
ESNFor 0Against 22Abst. 0No vote 3 of 25Majority line AgainstClear line Against Cohesion 1.00
No groupFor 11Against 7Abst. 5No vote 5 of 28Majority line —Clear line No line Cohesion —

Members who changed group are counted in the group of the day: Branko GRIMS changed group, Elena YONCHEVA changed group, Elisabetta GUALMINI changed group, Ewa ZAJĄCZKOWSKA-HERNIK changed group, Fernand KARTHEISER changed group, Jessika VAN LEEUWEN changed group, Laurent CASTILLO changed group, Lukas SIEPER changed group, Malika SOREL changed group, Milan MAZUREK changed group, Nikola BARTŮŠEK changed group, Nikolas FARANTOURIS changed group, Pina PICIERNO changed group, Roberto VANNACCI changed group, Sander SMIT changed group, Taner KABILOV changed group.

Countries × groups

How each country’s members of each group voted.

S&D members by country who voted for, against or abstained (group at the date of the vote).
CountryForAgainstAbst.Bar
Austria500
Belgium300
Cyprus100
Germany1000
Denmark030
Estonia100
Spain1600
Finland200
France800
Greece300
Croatia400
Ireland100
Italy1700
Lithuania200
Luxembourg100
Latvia100
Malta300
Netherlands300
Poland300
Portugal700
Romania600
Sweden500
Slovenia100

Members

Each member’s recorded position, in the group they sat in that day. Filter by country, group, position or name.

Show all 561 members

No vote recorded, 158

Members in office that day without a recorded position. No vote recorded is not the same as absent: leave, illness or chairing the sitting look the same.

Show the 158 members

Name · group that day · country

Similar votes

Roll calls that split the chamber the most similarly: r is the correlation of members’ positions, over the members who voted in both. Other votes on the same decision are left out.

Result: for–against–abstained. For: share of the votes cast. Requested by: the groups that asked for a roll call.
DateVoteKindResultForRequested byr · shared
17 Sept 2026Amendment 39, adding text after paragraph 13 The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external bordersAmendment257 for, 331 against, 7 abstained Rejected For 43 %Requested by Greensr · shared0.95 468 voters
17 Sept 2026Amendment 52 to paragraph 11 The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external bordersAmendment259 for, 336 against, 7 abstained Rejected For 43 %Requested by S&Dr · shared0.95 473 voters
17 Sept 2026Amendment 34, adding text after paragraph 11 The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external bordersAmendment261 for, 335 against, 4 abstained Rejected For 44 %Requested by Greensr · shared0.95 472 voters
Show 7 more
Result: for–against–abstained. For: share of the votes cast. Requested by: the groups that asked for a roll call.
DateVoteKindResultForRequested byr · shared
12 Feb 2026Paragraph 1, point aa — part 4 Recommendation to the Council on EU priorities for the 70th session of the UN Commission on the Status of WomenSplit vote243 for, 303 against, 10 abstained Rejected For 44 %Requested by Greensr · shared0.95 449 voters
17 Sept 2026Amendment 29 to paragraph 6 The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external bordersAmendment261 for, 340 against, 6 abstained Rejected For 43 %Requested by Greensr · shared0.95 475 voters
17 Sept 2026Amendment 16, adding text after recital G The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU’s external bordersAmendment252 for, 326 against, 8 abstained Rejected For 43 %Requested by Greensr · shared0.94 463 voters
29 Apr 2026Recital AP — part 2 Situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025Split vote273 for, 337 against, 12 abstained Rejected For 44 %Requested by Greens, EPPr · shared0.94 492 voters
12 Feb 2026Paragraph 1, point aa — part 3 Recommendation to the Council on EU priorities for the 70th session of the UN Commission on the Status of WomenSplit vote251 for, 296 against, 8 abstained Rejected For 45 %Requested by Greensr · shared0.94 452 voters
29 Apr 2026Paragraph 101 — part 2 Situation of fundamental rights in the European Union in 2024 and 2025Split vote293 for, 343 against, 6 abstained Rejected For 46 %Requested by Greens, EPPr · shared0.94 503 voters
22 May 2025Separate vote on paragraph 2 Deliberations of the Committee on Petitions in 2023Separate vote266 for, 304 against, 22 abstained Rejected For 45 %Requested by EPPr · shared0.94 477 voters

How similarity is measured

Compare with another vote

Groups’ lines side by side, and the members who switched between the two votes.

Connections

This vote’s decision, the other votes on it, and related votes.

Show 11 connections: The decision · Other votes on this decision

The decision

Other votes on this decision

See all: Other votes on this decision

Sources & citation

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

Permalink
https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/votes/2024-12-19/171324
Official sources
Data source
Licensed CC BY 4.0.
Retrieved
25 September 2026

Cite as

European Parliament (2024). “Paragraph 1, point ae — part 2 — Recommendation to the Council on the EU priorities for the 69th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women”. Vote, 19 December 2024. votingId 171324, reference 2024/2057(INI). EU Parl Watch Research. https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/votes/2024-12-19/171324 (retrieved 25 September 2026). Official sources: Roll-call votes, sitting of 19 December 2024 (European Parliament), https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PV-10-2024-12-19-RCV_EN.html; Results of votes, sitting of 19 December 2024 (European Parliament), https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PV-10-2024-12-19-VOT_EN.html. Data: EP Open Data API: vote results of the sitting MTG-PL-2024-12-19, https://data.europarl.europa.eu/api/v2/meetings/MTG-PL-2024-12-19/vote-results?format=application%2Fld%2Bjson (CC BY 4.0).
BibTeX 
@misc{epw-vote-2024-12-19-171324,
  author = {{European Parliament}},
  title = {{Paragraph 1, point ae — part 2 — Recommendation to the Council on the EU priorities for the 69th session of the UN Commission on the Status of Women}},
  year = {2024},
  date = {2024-12-19},
  howpublished = {\url{https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/votes/2024-12-19/171324}},
  url = {https://news.eu-parl.st-solutions.dev/votes/2024-12-19/171324},
  urldate = {2026-09-25},
  publisher = {EU Parl Watch Research},
  note = {Vote. votingId 171324, reference 2024/2057(INI). Official source: https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PV-10-2024-12-19-RCV\_EN.html, https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/PV-10-2024-12-19-VOT\_EN.html. Data: EP Open Data API: vote results of the sitting MTG-PL-2024-12-19 (CC BY 4.0)}
}