Motions

Parliamentary calendar

Browse recorded motions

Select a marked sitting day to view its voting record.

Only motions with potential benefits for Russia

7 recorded motions

Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09	First reading	A10-0185/2026	Establishment of the digital euro Discussion transcript Establishment of the digital euro Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Sophie WILMÈS (Chair) The next vote is on the establishment of the digital euro (see minutes, item 9.2). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Opinion Draft report Amendments Amendments Amendments Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Plenary report · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-09	First reading	A10-0185/2026	Vote details Decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations Plain-language guide Decision to enter into interinstitutional negotiations This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote decides whether Parliament enters negotiations with EU member states on creating a digital euro. It launches talks to set rules for a digital currency backed by the European Central Bank. What a Yes vote means Would approve starting negotiations with EU member states to establish rules for a digital euro backed by the European Central Bank. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 416 169 22 111
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09	Second reading	C10-0178/2026	Temporary derogation from the ePrivacy directive	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · Partial vote · 1st reading Adopted text · Partial vote · 1st reading · Summary Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary Adopted text · 2nd reading Adopted text · 2nd reading · Summary
2026-07-09	Second reading	C10-0178/2026	Vote details Amendments 1, 2 and 7 · Proposal for rejection Plain-language guide Amendments 1, 2 and 7 · Proposal for rejection This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendments to the eprivacy directive lacks available official wording, so its concrete impact cannot be determined. What a Yes vote means Would adopt the specified amendments to the eprivacy directive proposal. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 314 276 17 111 Amendment 8 · Article 1, paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 8 · Article 1, paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Am 8 inserts text at Article 1, paragraph 1 of the ePrivacy directive derogation, but the official source wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text at Article 1, paragraph 1 of the ePrivacy derogation, though the official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 117 422 66 113 Amendment 9 · Article 1, paragraph 2 Plain-language guide Amendment 9 · Article 1, paragraph 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official wording of Amendment 9 to Article 1, paragraph 2 of the ePrivacy directive derogation is unavailable in the parliamentary report. What a Yes vote means Would replace the specified text with an amendment whose official wording is unavailable in the parliamentary source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 114 422 60 122 Amendment 30 · Article 1, after paragraph 2 Plain-language guide Amendment 30 · Article 1, after paragraph 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add text at Article 1, after paragraph 2 of the draft position, though the official source wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the specified text to Parliament's draft position, though the exact official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 369 236 6 107 Amendment 10 · Article 2, after point 4 Plain-language guide Amendment 10 · Article 2, after point 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment targets Article 2 after point 4; the official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the specified text to Article 2 after point 4. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 161 433 12 112 Amendment 11 · Article 2, after point 4 Plain-language guide Amendment 11 · Article 2, after point 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 11 to Article 2 of the temporary ePrivacy derogation concerns an insertion location, but the official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add text to Article 2 after point 4 as specified in Amendment 11, though the exact substantive wording is not provided in the sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 120 433 52 113 Amendment 12 · Article 2, after point 4 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · Article 2, after point 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment targets Article 2 after point 4; the official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the specified text to Article 2 after point 4. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 158 433 11 116 Amendment 13 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a Plain-language guide Amendment 13 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 13 for the ePrivacy directive temporary derogation concerns Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, though the exact official wording is unavailable in the sources. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text at Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, with the official wording that is currently unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 119 434 51 114 Amendments 26, 31 and 4 (part 1) · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a Plain-language guide Amendments 26, 31 and 4 (part 1) · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Official wording for Amendment 26 to Article 3, paragraph 1, point a in the ePrivacy directive report is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text at Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, though the exact substantive change is unavailable in official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 345 237 18 118 Amendment 14 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a Plain-language guide Amendment 14 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Am 14 for Article 3 paragraph 1 point a changes Parliament draft position, but exact official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the specified point in Article 3, though the exact official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 160 433 11 114 Amendment 15 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a Plain-language guide Amendment 15 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official text for Amendment 15 affecting Article 3, paragraph 1, point a of the temporary derogation from the ePrivacy directive is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would adopt the specified amendment at Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, though the exact text is not provided in the official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 161 430 10 117 Amendments 26, 31 and 4 (part 2) · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a Plain-language guide Amendments 26, 31 and 4 (part 2) · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote concerns Amendment 26 to Article 3 of the temporary derogation from the ePrivacy directive, but the official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the specified text at Article 3, point a, though the exact official wording for this amendment is currently unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 346 254 3 115 Amendments 26, 31, 6 and 21 (part 3) · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a Plain-language guide Amendments 26, 31, 6 and 21 (part 3) · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 26 for Article 3, paragraph 1, point a of the temporary ePrivacy directive derogation concerns an update whose official text is currently unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the specified text at Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, though the exact official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 362 235 5 116 Amendment 5 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, after point 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point a, after point 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 5 for the temporary derogation from the ePrivacy directive relates to Article 3, point 1, where the official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add the specified text to Article 3, though the exact official wording remains unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 322 255 36 105 Amendment 27 · Article 3, paragraph 1, after point a Plain-language guide Amendment 27 · Article 3, paragraph 1, after point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 27 to the temporary ePrivacy directive derogation concerns Article 3, paragraph 1, after point a, though the exact official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision to Article 3, paragraph 1, after point a regarding the temporary ePrivacy directive derogation, though the exact text is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 175 408 22 113 Amendment 16 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point b Plain-language guide Amendment 16 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point b This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description For Article 3, paragraph 1, point b of the ePrivacy derogation, Amendment 16 official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the unavailable official text for the ePrivacy derogation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 154 421 19 124 Amendment 17D · Article 3, paragraph 1, point d Plain-language guide Amendment 17D · Article 3, paragraph 1, point d This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Amendment 17D on Article 3, paragraph 1, point d of the temporary ePrivacy derogation; official wording unavailable in sources. What a Yes vote means Would replace the designated text to change Parliament's draft position on the ePrivacy directive derogation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 86 479 41 112 Amendment 18 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point iii Plain-language guide Amendment 18 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point iii This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description For Am 18 at Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point iii, the official source wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text at Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point iii. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 119 436 51 112 Amendment 19 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point vii Plain-language guide Amendment 19 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point vii This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 19 to the ePrivacy directive temporary derogation concerns Article 3, paragraph 1, point g, point vii, but its exact official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the specified point in the Parliament's draft position with text that is officially unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 110 432 62 114 Amendment 20 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point j Plain-language guide Amendment 20 · Article 3, paragraph 1, point j This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 20 to article 3 of the ePrivacy directive derogation has unavailable official wording in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text at article 3 paragraph 1 point j of the parliament draft position. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 142 434 30 112 Amendment 28 · After Article 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 28 · After Article 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official wording for amendment 28 after Article 3 is unavailable in the parliamentary report. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text in the ePrivacy directive derogation as specified in the unavailable amendment 28. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 175 399 23 121 Amendment 29 · Article 11 Plain-language guide Amendment 29 · Article 11 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Official wording for Amendment 29 to Article 11 in the ePrivacy derogation file is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace the absent official text location with an unverified draft change. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 353 254 7 104 Amendment 22 · After recital 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 22 · After recital 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment would add a recital after recital 5, but its official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital after recital 5; its official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? Official amendment wording is unavailable, so Russia impact cannot be assessed. 164 425 14 115 Amendment 23 · After recital 8 Plain-language guide Amendment 23 · After recital 8 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment would add a recital after recital 8, but its official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital after recital 8; its official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? Official amendment wording is unavailable, so Russia impact cannot be assessed. 170 412 19 117 Amendment 3 · Recital 11 Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · Recital 11 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 3 to recital 11 of the temporary derogation from the ePrivacy directive lacks official source wording in the parliamentary documents. What a Yes vote means Would adopt amendment 3 as an insertion or replacement at recital 11, though the specific official text is unavailable in the sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 257 292 59 110 Amendment 24 · After recital 13 Plain-language guide Amendment 24 · After recital 13 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment would add a recital after recital 13, but its official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital after recital 13; its official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? Official amendment wording is unavailable, so Russia impact cannot be assessed. 162 424 18 114 Amendment 25 · Recital 32 Plain-language guide Amendment 25 · Recital 32 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote addresses the amendment at Recital 32 within the ePrivacy directive temporary derogation, though the official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the amendment at Recital 32, as the specific text is unavailable in the official source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 157 385 20 156 Proposal for rejection Plain-language guide Proposal for rejection This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote rejects the proposal for a temporary derogation from the ePrivacy directive, stopping the proposed exception to allow online child sexual abuse material detection rules. What a Yes vote means Would replace the legislative text by rejecting the Commission proposal for a temporary ePrivacy directive derogation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 276 286 30 126
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09		B10-0357/2026	The threat of war crimes, the escalating violations of international humanitarian law and the human rights situation in El-Obeid, Sudan Discussion transcript The threat of war crimes, the escalating violations of international humanitarian law and the human rights situation in El-Obeid, Sudan Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Sophie WILMÈS (Chair) The next vote is on the threat of war crimes, the escalating violations of international humanitarian law and the human rights situation in El-Obeid, Sudan (see minutes, item 9.5). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion
2026-07-09		B10-0357/2026	Vote details Paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on El-Obeid war crimes approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning atrocities and demanding humanitarian access. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes and calling for humanitarian access. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 594 4 7 113 Paragraph 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes and human rights violations in El-Obeid, Sudan, and calls for accountability. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes and human rights violations in Sudan and urging immediate accountability. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 594 2 122 Paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This whole-motion vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes in El-Obeid, Sudan, and urging civilian protection. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position condemning Sudan war crimes and urging civilian protection. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 532 49 25 112 Paragraph 4 Plain-language guide Paragraph 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position and urges accountability for war crimes and human rights abuses in El-Obeid, Sudan. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position demanding accountability for war crimes and humanitarian relief in Sudan. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 570 10 20 118 Amendment 6 · After paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · After paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an unavailable amendment concerning Sudan lacks official source text for its policy content. What a Yes vote means Would add text to the resolution on Sudan based on the unverified amendment. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 172 431 4 111 Amendment 2 · After paragraph 4 Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · After paragraph 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add after paragraph 4 of the Sudan war crimes resolution; the official amendment wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the specified text after paragraph 4 of the Parliament motion. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 87 454 62 115 Paragraph 5, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 5, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes in El-Obeid, Sudan, and demanding civilian protection. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's position demanding accountability for war crimes and humanitarian access in El-Obeid. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 583 1 19 115 Paragraph 5, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 5, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes in El-Obeid and demanding humanitarian aid access. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position condemning Sudan war crimes and urging aid access. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 291 280 33 114 Paragraph 5, part 3 Plain-language guide Paragraph 5, part 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the crisis in El-Obeid, Sudan, highlighting accountability for war crimes and humanitarian access. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position, prioritising human rights protection, humanitarian aid access and accountability for war crimes. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 563 14 28 113 Paragraph 5, part 4 Plain-language guide Paragraph 5, part 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament’s non-binding position addressing war crimes, human rights violations, and humanitarian crises in El-Obeid, Sudan. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position prioritizing accountability for human rights abuses and humanitarian aid access in Sudan. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 292 279 32 115 Paragraph 5, part 5 Plain-language guide Paragraph 5, part 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes in El-Obeid, Sudan, and demanding civilian protection. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position condemning Sudan war crimes and urging civilian protection. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 543 23 36 116 Amendment 3 · After paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · After paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the text after paragraph 5 with official wording that is currently unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text after paragraph 5 with official wording that is currently unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 85 445 68 120 Amendment 4 · After paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an unavailable amendment for El-Obeid, Sudan, modifies the joint motion text where official wording is missing. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text in the Sudan motion according to the unavailable amendment details. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 72 482 49 115 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 6 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 6 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an amendment after paragraph 6 of the Sudan resolution addresses human rights in El-Obeid, though its exact text is officially unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision to Parliament's draft position for Sudan, though the specific wording is officially unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 100 404 94 120 Paragraph 7, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 7, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes in El-Obeid, Sudan, and demanding accountability. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position condemning war crimes and rights violations in Sudan. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 580 2 17 119 Paragraph 7, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 7, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote condemns ongoing war crimes, human rights abuses, and violations of international humanitarian law in El-Obeid, Sudan, and demands urgent humanitarian access. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position to condemn atrocities in Sudan, demand accountability for violations, and call for unimpeded aid access. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 281 285 31 121 Amendment 1 · After recital D Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · After recital D This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an amendment after recital D of the resolution on El-Obeid, Sudan, lacks official source text, meaning its specific policy content is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add text whose official wording is unavailable in the parliamentary records. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 188 330 84 116 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the escalating humanitarian crisis and human rights violations in El-Obeid, Sudan. It calls for immediate action to protect civilians and address war crimes. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and demand immediate civilian protection, accountability for war crimes, and humanitarian access in Sudan. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 476 28 96 118
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09		B10-0345/2026	Ongoing persecution of Christians in Nigeria, notably the Kawel village massacre Discussion transcript Ongoing persecution of Christians in Nigeria, notably the Kawel village massacre Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Sophie WILMÈS (Chair) The next vote is on the ongoing persecution of Christians in Nigeria, notably the Kawel village massacre (see minutes, item 9.6). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion
2026-07-09		B10-0345/2026	Vote details Amendment 2/1 · paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 2/1 · paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote concerns an unavailable amendment regarding the Kawel village massacre in Nigeria, as the official text is missing from the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text with the official paragraph, though the exact wording is unavailable in the official source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 177 412 8 121 Amendment 2/2 · paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 2/2 · paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 2/2 to paragraph 1 of the resolution on the Kawel village massacre addresses the ongoing persecution of Christians in Nigeria, though the exact official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add the specified text to paragraph 1 concerning the resolution on the persecution of Christians in Nigeria, noting that the exact official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 190 402 4 122 Amendment 6/1 · paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 6/1 · paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment updates the resolution on the Kawel village massacre in Nigeria, but its exact wording is unavailable in the official sources. What a Yes vote means Would add an update to the resolution, though the precise text is missing from the official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 194 392 9 123 Amendment 6/2 · paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 6/2 · paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official wording of amendment Am 6/2 for the resolution on persecution in Nigeria is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace the specified section of Parliament's draft position with the amendment's text, the exact wording of which is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 148 414 35 121 Amendment 4/1 · Recital C Plain-language guide Amendment 4/1 · Recital C This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace RC-B10-0345/2026/REV1 Recital C Am 4/1; official wording unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace RC-B10-0345/2026/REV1 Recital C Am 4/1; official wording unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 207 379 8 124 Amendment 4/2 · Recital C Plain-language guide Amendment 4/2 · Recital C This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official text for RC-B10-0345/2026/REV1 Recital C Amendment 4/2 is unavailable in the official source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace Recital C with the exact official amendment text, though the specific wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 133 422 40 123 Amendment 5 · Recital E Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · Recital E This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official text for Amendment 5 to Recital E of RC-B10-0345/2026/REV1 is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the text for Amendment 5. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 195 391 9 123 Amendment 1 · Recital E Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · Recital E This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 1 to recital E of the resolution on the Kawel village massacre has unavailable official wording in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text in recital E of the resolution on the Kawel village massacre, though the exact official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 176 412 3 127 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position condemning violence against Christians in Nigeria and urging protections. It calls on Nigerian authorities to investigate the Kawel village massacre and safeguard vulnerable communities. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's position condemning Nigerian Christian persecution and calling for accountability and protection. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 510 1 86 121
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09		B10-0346/2026	The abduction, forced conversion and child marriage of Maria Shahbaz and the protection of girls in Pakistan Discussion transcript The abduction, forced conversion and child marriage of Maria Shahbaz and the protection of girls in Pakistan Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Sophie WILMÈS (Chair) The next vote is on the abduction, forced conversion and child marriage of Maria Shahbaz and the protection of girls in Pakistan (see minutes, item 9.7). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion Resolution motion
2026-07-09		B10-0346/2026	Vote details Amendment 1 · After paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · After paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an unavailable amendment concerning Maria Shahbaz in Pakistan lacks official text in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add text to the motion, though the exact substantive wording is missing from the official records. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 301 281 14 122 Amendment 5 · paragraph 6 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · paragraph 6 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description For amendment 5 to paragraph 6 of the motion on the protection of girls in Pakistan, the official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text at paragraph 6 as the official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 312 248 27 131 Amendment 6 · paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Amendment 6 to paragraph 7 of the motion on Maria Shahbaz lacks official text in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text in paragraph 7 of the motion on Maria Shahbaz. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 334 231 29 124 Amendment 3 · Recital B Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · Recital B This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official wording of Amendment 3 to Recital B in the Pakistan girls protection resolution is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add the text specified in Amendment 3, though the exact official wording is unavailable in the source documents. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 310 261 21 126 Amendment 4 · After recital D Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After recital D This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 4 concerning the protection of girls in Pakistan lacks available official text. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text in the draft resolution, though the specific official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 480 77 32 129
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09		A10-0167/2026	Feasibility of a 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness Discussion transcript Feasibility of a 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Christel SCHALDEMOSE (Chair) The next item is the debate on the report by Ľudovít Ódor, on behalf of the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, on the feasibility of a 28th tax regime and its potential to support EU competitiveness (2025/2211(INI)) (A10-0167/2026). I would like to remind speakers that, given the test measures currently in place and the fixed end time of debate, strict observance to speaking time will be required for all of you. Thank you very much for your understanding. Ľudovít ÓDOR Dear President, Commissioner, colleagues, Europe is facing a new geopolitical and economic reality. Rules matter less than they once did. Power and scale matters more. In this context, our single market remains one of the most underutilised assets at our disposal. The European Union is clearly punching below its weight. We are failing to fully leverage the strength that comes with providing access to a market of 450 million consumers. The evidence is striking: among the world's 50 largest companies by market capitalisation, only one is European. In 2025, Europe had just 331 unicorns, compared with almost 2 000 in the United States. Since 2008, nearly 30 % of European unicorns have relocated their headquarters outside the EU. Venture capital investment in Europe amounts to around EUR 30 billion, compared with USD 177 billion in the United States. The million dollar question is, why? The answer, from my perspective, is twofold. First, the EU lacks sufficient high risk investments due to the absence of a genuine savings and investment union. Second, even in areas requiring lower-risk investment, we underperform because of fragmentation. What are the main obstacles to cross-border growth? When we ask SMEs, start-ups and scale-ups, they consistently identify three major challenges. First, navigating different business environment across Member States. Second, the complexity of accessing information, understanding rules and complying with administrative procedure. Third, taxation. I welcome the Commission's proposal for an 'EU Inc.'. It really represents an important first step towards creating a genuine single market for start-ups and scale-ups. Its objective is to enable companies to operate seamlessly across borders without unnecessary barriers. However, the proposal is not ambitious enough, as it focuses primarily on corporate law. This presents two shortcomings. First, without addressing the entire lifecycle of a company, its impact will inevitably remain limited. Second, the proposal should draw more extensively on successful international best practices. In our report, we advocate a modular approach that builds on the corporate law framework as its foundation. At the same time, to ensure political feasibility, the tax module should initially apply only to a limited group of companies such as growth oriented start-ups and scale-ups. These companies usually generate only a marginal share of overall tax revenues. I would like to highlight a few points from the report. First, we propose a framework based on fully digital procedures, a one-stop shop, harmonised templates. Second, we call for a single consolidated corporate tax base and the uniform methodology for determining taxable income. Third, we propose effective measures to eliminate double taxation. Fourth, we support the creation of a centralised VAT framework. Fifth, we recommend introducing a mandatory employee stock option. Sixth, we call for targeted rules to provide tax certainty for employees moving between Member States. Finally, we encourage better coordination of tax incentives across the union. Dubravka Šuica Madam President, honourable Members, in March this year, the Commission adopted the proposal for the 28th regime corporate legal framework – 'EU Inc.'. The 'EU Inc.' initiative is a key measure aimed at enhancing Europe's competitiveness and improving the business environment for EU companies. As part of the broader instrument, it includes limited ancillary tax measures designed to support businesses. As you know, the 'EU Inc.' proposal is based on five main pillars. First, digital-by-default procedures throughout the lifecycle of 'EU Inc.' companies. Second, extension of the 'once only' principle for provision of information. Third, facilitation of investment. Fourth, support for the attraction and retention of talent. And fifth, access to digital and simplified insolvency procedures for innovative start‑ups. I am pleased to address you today at the occasion of the debate of the own initiative, which is, of course, a different subject entirely. We thank the European Parliament, in particular MEP Ľudovít Ódor and his team for the important work. We are pleased to see that the report welcomes the Commission proposal on 'EU Inc.'. The message we received from stakeholders was clear: companies need EU‑wide rules that are harmonised and simple. Companies also pointed to the need for more digital processes in Europe. The 'EU Inc.' proposal responds to these needs. It provides for an ambitious, harmonised corporate legal framework which will be available in each Member State for both founders and existing companies. From a tax perspective, the proposal already includes two concrete, but strictly ancillary, measures: First, the application of the 'once only' principle to reduce the administrative burden on 'EU Inc.' companies. This means that, in the registration process, the 'EU Inc.' information submitted to the business register will be automatically shared with tax authorities in view of obtaining the tax identification number (TIN) and the VAT identification number. There will be no need for 'EU Inc.' companies to resubmit paperwork multiple times. Second is a tax deferral for employee stock options to support the ability of 'EU Inc.' to attract and retain talent. This means that employees investing in an 'EU Inc.' through an EU employee stock option plan will benefit from a simpler scheme with a harmonised set of characteristics. From the tax perspective, it also means that the employees to whom warrants under the stock option plan are issued will not be taxed until the actual sale of the underlying shares. The tax elements in the 'EU Inc.' proposal strike exactly the right balance. They deliver highly targeted and practical measures that support our broader objective, but by enabling businesses to reap the full benefit of the single market, while respecting Member States' competences in tax matters. The own‑initiative report highlights the room for simplification. We agree with that. We also concur that there is room for additional and more targeted harmonisation, as you rightly said, of tax matters to improve the business environment in the single market. So we can we can improve this. Luděk NIEDERMAYER Madam President, the Commission proposal for the creation of the 28th regime is one of the most visible, important and possibly impactful proposals that we have got on the table in this term. It would make the single market much stronger and it will provide start-ups and scale-ups with a better framework on how to keep their activity within the EU, because this is a very substantial problem. We have in Europe excellent education. We are rich in ideas and innovations. We have entrepreneurship, but unfortunately most of the companies, when they are starting to take off and are on the way to success, they are leaving our market. The Commission proposal that is now being discussed is a first step towards creating such a regime. Digitalisation is very good because it will provide companies with a simplified environment. A key component is clarity in the regime of employees' shares. This is a very good proposal and I just call on our House and the Council not to water it down: make it stronger and pass it quickly. But this is by far not enough, especially for scale-ups to stay in Europe. Better to have a tax regime that will simplify life, especially for the companies operating across several Member States. Clarity of taxation, avoidance of double taxation, a good regime for R&D expenditures and many other aspects are very important to enable them to stay in our market. So that's why we will ask today the House to vote for the proposal that will allow all of this. We opt for the CCCTB to simplify the life of companies operating across the market. We call for reducing the risk of double taxation and the creation of uncertainty, and for the expenditures to be dealt with. This is the way to create a genuine market for successful start-ups in Europe; to allow them to flourish, but also allow European investors to invest safely in these companies and not go abroad. I hope we will we will succeed in that, and I hope the Commission will come with more modules that will make this regime more usable and richer. Bruno GONÇALVES Madam President, dear colleagues, we are living in a historic moment. And, as Mario Draghi warned us, the European Union is moving towards a new era of competitiveness, or we risk falling behind definitively. And that is why today we challenge 27 Member States representing 450 million people, but also 450 million consumers. This is the first sign so that start-ups, small and medium-sized enterprises in Europe that want to grow can innovate and create jobs. Instead of 27 bureaucratic regimes, we advocate the creation of an alternative pathway that allows operating immediately in all countries, in an agile and fast way. This is the time to put an end to the national egoisms that prevent a less complex, but inevitably also more effective tax system; with less paperwork, but also less tax evasion. This 28th regime is not meant to circumvent the rules and, therefore, we make it clear that social protections, namely labor protections for the worker, remain alive, and that tax planning schemes are avoided. Neither social dumping, nor fiscal dumping, nor the ability to fill out paperwork can define which are the most competitive companies in the European Union. So that start-ups and small family businesses can compete with the most powerful ones, we need to offer them ways to attract talent and retain the brightest. It was precisely for this reason that we accepted, agreed, and negotiated a modernization of labor income, admitting that workers' stock options should not suffer a penalty compared to investors who buy and sell shares. This is indeed defending workers, defending the youngest, but this is also a new labor agenda for the youngest. This incentive is a specific and isolated case, but one that should motivate us for a broader reflection. What sense does it make to tax a worker more who decided to invest in themselves and a promising start-up than a speculator who just buys and sells shares? The answer is very simple: it makes no sense at all. The moment and the desire is for the Commission and the Council to work on this great challenge and for us to begin thinking about the great challenge that is the common European challenge. Enikő GYŐRI Madam President! It is not by chance that tax policy falls within the competence of member states. The treaties clearly respect national fiscal sovereignty, the differing economic endowments of the member states, and fair competition. Yet the Parliament's grand coalition, from the left to the People's Party, is making repeated attempts to hollow out this competence. This report is not really about competitiveness. This is a master plan for the gradual dismantling of member state tax policy. First, a voluntarily applicable so-called 28th taxation regime would be introduced. This would be followed by a harmonized corporate tax base, which has already failed several times before, and finally, qualified majority voting would be introduced for certain tax matters. This clearly goes against the treaties and the principle of unanimity, which serves precisely to preserve the sovereign tax policies of the member states. Tax competition between member states is not a problem, but a strength. It encourages governments to operate a more efficient state with a more attractive business environment and responsible management in order to keep European companies in Europe. Today, the problem is not caused by differing corporate tax systems, but by high energy prices and still-growing bureaucracy. These are the issues that should be addressed, rather than confiscating further competencies from the member states. Moreover, the report would shape the system of tax allowances on an ideological basis: they would be tied to politically preferred green investments, while sidelining the development of many traditional, currently competitive European industries. The task of tax policy is not to reward ideological goals, but to stimulate investment, create jobs, and strengthen businesses. We, Patriots, want a Europe that preserves the tax sovereignty of member states and strengthens economic competition through freedom rather than centralization. Not a Europe where Brussels institutions are constantly busy increasing their own power. Giovanni CROSETTO Madam President, honourable colleagues, the issues of simplification and tax harmonisation are fundamental when we speak about the competitiveness of our enterprises. For example, in Italy we have just transposed the global minimum tax to bring the principle of tax harmonisation into the area of corporate income tax. We agree, for example, that start-ups could be precisely the right target for this initiative, given the large gap we must bridge in terms of investments to try to transform start-ups into scale-ups. However, we do not agree that there is a need to move to qualified majority voting, because if these proposals are truly made in the interest of enterprises, we are certain that all Member States unanimously will agree. Gilles BOYER Madam President, Madam Commissioner, Mr Rapporteur Ódor, this text is an important founding text to enable our SMEs, our mid-sized companies and innovative players to operate fully on the scale of the single market, by limiting administrative formalities and obstacles to development within the European Union – all companies wishing to have an activity in several countries of the European Union must be able to do so without hindrance. By facilitating access to capital, by offering a more predictable environment, this text takes an essential step. Obviously, the fragmentation of our tax systems remains a major obstacle, in particular for cross-border activities. This text is therefore only a first step. Complementary reforms will be necessary, which will pave the way – I hope, we hope, many of us hope here – towards essential tax harmonisation for the development of our markets. Kira Marie PETER-HANSEN Madam President, thank you very much, first of all, to the rapporteur of this file. Europe needs companies that can grow, innovate and compete across borders. For too many start-ups and scale-ups, the single market still feels too fragmented, too complicated and too slow. To counteract this, I think we all agree that we must ensure harmonisation of the single market. But, in the pursuit of harmonisation, it is very important that it doesn't become deregulation. Because when we create a new European tax framework, it must not become a shortcut for companies looking to avoid their responsibilities. It must not become another loophole in a system that is already too easy to exploit for those with the best lawyers and the best accountants. That is why we, from the Greens/EFA side, have insisted on clear safeguards, because a 28th tax regime should support real economic activity, not artificial structures. It should help European start-ups and scale-ups, not large corporations shopping for the lowest obligations. And it should go hand in hand with workers' rights, social protection and upward convergence. Because Europe's competitiveness cannot be built on tax avoidance, weaker standards or a race to the bottom. It must be built on fairness and transparency. That is the balance that we have worked for in this report, and that is the balance that Europe needs. I would like to thank the rapporteur again for the good cooperation, and I hope a broad majority will support this today in the plenary. Jussi SARAMO Mr President, those who benefit most from our system should also contribute most to its financing. However, the largest companies and their wealthiest owners pay the least amount of tax. This is not a law of nature, this is the result of political decisions: taxation is full of loopholes. It is indeed a real problem that we have one market, but 27 tax systems, each country with its own. The largest corporations exploit this fragmentation to evade taxes. That is a problem for the financing of welfare states, but also for smaller companies that do not have the resources for tax bureaucracy. But does it help if we create yet another, 28th tax system? It would be more sensible to harmonise the technical systems so that a growth company could handle its taxes through a single window without bureaucracy. Member states could continue to decide the level of taxation, as long as they do not fall below the OECD minimum levels – hopefully in the future UN minimum levels, which would be higher than the current ones. If the 28th tax system is built, its sole objective must be to facilitate business growth across member state borders. We on the left do not accept any arrangement aimed at reducing taxation. I am voting in favour of the report currently under consideration because it recognises the dangers and demands accountability from the Commission. And I too want to thank the rapporteur and shadow rapporteur for very good, constructive cooperation. Fernando NAVARRETE ROJAS Madam President, Commissioner, a 28th tax regime for start-ups and scale-ups has the potential to help these companies have better funding options and have access to larger markets to expand and innovate. This can help Europe move away from the medium-technology trap that is currently keeping the EU's economy behind. To keep up globally, we need far more disruption and innovation in our economy. That is how a prosperous future for all is built. That is why I want to encourage the Commission to act with ambition to use this new single market integrating tool to the fullest, expanding its application to the largest possible scope of firms and topical areas. This is a testbed for what this new tool can deliver to culminate a common market that IMF data is showing is far away from completion. Let me close with a new potential disruptive application of the 28th regime, namely, bringing with legal certainty the full potential of DLT technology and tokenisation to the very core of our financial system to reduce costs and increase the scale and speed. This is an area where Europe could get a double dividend. Firstly, new financial markets that would be pan-European from the start, avoiding current fragmentation, and secondly, a first-mover advantage that could attract global liquidity. Commissioner, the name of the game is ambition. Act here. Jonás FERNÁNDEZ Madam President, Commissioner, this parliamentary term we have focused one of the major debates, at least in the economic field, on the objective of improving the competitiveness of the European economy. In these two years of the parliamentary term we have discussed various initiatives to try to simplify, adapt and improve regulatory frameworks. But we have truly been lacking in ambition when it comes to tackling the central challenge to truly raise competitiveness: putting an end to the fragmentation of the single market. It is hard to understand how Europeans could have agreed to have a shared monetary policy and yet, year after year, we have been unable to agree on having a tax policy or a fiscal policy to accompany the development of that single market and to help, at the same time, remove national barriers. In this regard, the initiative to have a twenty-eighth regime—which in this Parliament is being led by my colleague René Repasi—is central to putting an end to these national barriers, to offering companies and workers a space in which to grow, in which to offer services and goods throughout the single market. This report—I want to congratulate the rapporteur—which addresses the taxation matter approaches the issue from a new perspective—a new contribution—to a discussion that, as I say, is central. If we want to raise the competitiveness of the European economy, consolidating the single market is the essential path. Pierre PIMPIE Madam President, dear colleagues, I do not refute the effects of market fragmentation within the EU on the competitiveness of businesses. But the EU must not seize upon every flaw, every pretext to advance its agenda and defy the principle of the fiscal and social sovereignty of States. It is the EU that undermines the competitiveness of businesses through its energy policies. It is the EU that destabilizes social systems through its migration injunctions. It is the EU that produces most of the standards that paralyze activity. It is therefore the EU that must consent to the simplification effort, without this amounting to flouting the States. Via the 28th regime, what is presented as optional could become the Trojan horse of a forced-march fiscal and social Europe. We do not want the EU to provide false solutions to the problems it has created. The EU embodies the aphorism that "the road to hell is paved with good intentions." However, we want Europe to liberate itself. Marlena MALĄG Madam President! It was supposed to be a simplification for businesses. What do we have? Federalist ambitions. Under the slogans of competitiveness and facilitation, an attempt is being made to deprive states of one of their most important prerogatives – tax policy. Why? To appropriate tax revenues, turn them into the European Union's own resources, make the Commission independent of Member State contributions, and create one huge EU budget. A budget from which Brussels will arbitrarily, under an increasing number of conditions, distribute funds. This has nothing to do with state sovereignty and the competences enshrined in the treaties. Brussels is taking it step by step. Let me remind you: VAT harmonization, administrative cooperation, corporate taxes, windfall taxes. This is nothing other than centralization and building Brussels' position as a superstate. There is no and will not be our consent to this. There is no consent to a fiscal union, there is no consent to depriving states of their treaty-based competences. We will not allow the Federal Republic of Europe to be built through the back door. Ana VASCONCELOS Madam President, Commissioner and colleagues, the EU's single market is bigger than the US's, with roughly 100 million more consumers. Yet our businesses struggle to grow because the market is really a patchwork of 27 fragmented legal systems that suffocate any small business that attempts to navigate it. We often boast about having more start-ups than the US. Yet 1 in 3 of them move abroad – mainly to America – just to have a chance to grow. The 28th regime is one of the most urgent steps to fix this. An optional European framework that businesses are free to choose. Quick, simplified, fully digital registration automatically valid in every Member State with common rules for incorporation, insolvency and labour. On tax, it generally takes the right approach – harmonising procedures while leaving tax decisions to Member States. As we advance, it is crucial that the fiscal autonomy of Member States remains respected. This is one very important step for our competitiveness. Let's deliver it urgently and ambitiously. Virginijus SINKEVIČIUS Madam President, dear colleagues. Europe is not short of talented people, nor of impressive companies and success stories. In Lithuania alone, we have more than one: whether it is Nord Security, Vinted, or carVertical. Each of them is a success story. However, for them to grow, they needed to jump over different barriers. Well, our single market – which is our greatest achievement – cannot be fragmented, and every time you want to grow and expand, you encounter 27 different regimes. Therefore, this discussion is very necessary, but it must lead to real practical steps. First of all, let us start not with talk about taxes, but with a single digital window for company registration. Then that same window, without any doubt, can also be used to declare those same taxes. And, of course, one clear value-added tax regime. There can be no duplication of procedures between member states. And without any doubt, clear rules on talent. There are not many of them, so companies must have the freedom to share them. Marc BOTENGA Madam President, I think that we cannot separate the two proposals of the so-called "28th regime" – or "Europe Inc.". So, we must look at the concrete problems we are facing today in terms of taxation. A first one is, obviously, tax avoidance and tax evasion, which today, according to conservative estimates, can reach up to 200 billion euros at the European level. The second problem is that, obviously, this often happens through shell companies, through "letterbox" companies and other small techniques, tax tricks. However, the question is: are we going to have a proposal today that will allow us to combat this, to combat this shortfall for the State, and therefore the lack of budget to invest in our infrastructure – and it is this infrastructure that will make it possible to have an industry, to have innovation, for precisely a Europe that you call competitive in your dogmas? Or are we going to do the opposite and destroy further, and offer more tax backdoors to companies that will create small businesses to bypass the rules? Lefteris NIKOLAOU-ALAVANOS Madam President, the so-called "28th regime" is stepping up the enhancement of the profitability of business groups. Through a single framework at the European Union level and providing for the simplification of procedures, it unleashes the cross-border activity of European monopolies in order to attract investment by pooling capital against competitors from China and the USA. With the tax unit, it foreshadows new tax reliefs for capital, which in Greece are even constitutionally enshrined; new gifts to the groups, which are accumulating record profits at the expense of the working people's income and are budgeting for over 1,000,000 sales. A prerequisite is to compress workers' rights to the limits of the fiscal tolerances of costed programmes, since the European Union cynically demands the linking of wages to business profitability. The plan is custom-made according to the Draghi report, which was welcomed by New Democracy, Tsipras, PASOK and the other bourgeois parties in Greece. The working people must turn their backs, and choose organized struggle for their own modern needs, against the European Union of monopolies and their governments. Lídia PEREIRA Madam President, today, a European company that wants to grow in the European space does not just find a market, it finds 27. It is confronted with dozens of different corporate forms, and distinct tax and legal systems. Dear colleagues, last week, I promoted the EPP Startup/Scaleup Summit in this Parliament. We welcomed founders, managers, and investors to debate the barriers to the growth of European companies. The conclusion was clear: we lack a market that is truly single. "EU Inc.", the 28th regime, solves part of this problem, but it must be viewed only as the first step. We also need to intervene in taxation and improve access to capital conditions. Data shows us that about 82% of startups that manage to scale end up moving to the United States looking for financing. And that is why this report is ambitious, but necessary. And that is also why I ask the Commission and the Council (which, unfortunately, is not here in this debate) for commitment and speed so that it is possible to close an agreement on this matter by the end of the year. Because, if we continue to delay, it is not competitiveness that will wait for us, it is Europeans who will fall behind. Matthias ECKE Madam President, dear colleagues! A local start-up pays its taxes where it operates economically, but a global corporation can often shift its profits to where it is most tax-favourable. That is an imbalance that we naturally do not want to exacerbate with the 28th regime. Therefore, our position is clear: Yes to the 28th regime for more competitiveness, to deepen the single market and to keep and strengthen our innovative companies here in Europe, but no to tax dumping through the back door. We do not want any new loopholes, no circumvention of binding protection standards and no erosion of our tax base. We want harmonization, a common corporate tax base and also more effective measures against tax avoidance. Therefore, it is also good that the report calls for examining the transition to qualified majority voting in parts of international tax policy, because that is exactly the institutional further development that we need. Angéline FURET Madam President, our continent is falling behind. Faced with unfair competition from China and the United States, our industry is retreating and our businesses are suffocating under the weight of your regulations. Faced with this economic decline, what does this report propose? Yet another bureaucratic invention: the creation of a 28th tax regime. We are being sold a supposedly optional framework to simplify the lives of our cross-border businesses. But no one is fooled. This 28th regime is a Trojan horse. Sitting on the Committee on Budgets, I know your strategy inside out. Behind this technical jargon lies your federalist obsession of always bypassing member states, destroying our fiscal sovereignty and laying the first stone of a major direct European tax. Instead of easing the burden crushing our SMEs, you are adding a 28th bureaucratic monstrosity. This is Brussels's evil par excellence: responding to a crisis caused by technocracy by inventing even more technocracy – instead of further easing that burden. True competitiveness cannot be decreed with federal arrangements. Faced with this disaster, we demand a clear break. If you really want to save our jobs, introduce strict European preference. Instead of inventing new taxes, protect our industries against Asian dumping. Instead of punishing our businesses with your green dictates, restore economic freedom to our nations. The right to levy taxes is the beating heart of our sovereignty. We will never let you steal it from us! Guillaume PELTIER Madam President, against your socialist tax buffoonery, I choose poetry: "A bee, at dawn's uprising, Visited a thousand flowers. The pollen became treasure. Honey flowed. The entire hive, workers and queens, lived. In exemplary order. A hornet appeared. Round belly. Coming from Brussels or Paris. Escorted by a thousand bumblebees. Your honey is fine: I levy from you. A tax on wax, The tithe on your sap. A tax on your hive. A toll on the sun. The octroi for your wings. The royalty for your sleep. The bee, weary of the scandal: What is the use of so many loyal works. If my work mostly feeds. He who produces not a single penny? Clemenceau said it: "France is a fertile country". Bureaucratic and servile killjoys are planted there. Taxes grow there every day, invented by fools. Fortunately, one risks losing by wanting to tax too much. And he who thought he could take without working is always caught. You are a thousand tax collectors. We are millions of producers. Smaller but more numerous. We will drive out the hornets. For here is the hour of the counter-revolution!" Per CLAUSEN Madam President! It sounds good when we talk about better access to capital, better competitiveness, and clear and easy-to-understand rules. All that sounds good. But we must remember that it is also about combating tax evasion, shell companies, other abuse of the tax system, and financial crime – also for the benefit of the companies that behave honorably. And if we get a system here that is used for tax evasion, for tax competition, and for undermining workers' rights, then it is certainly going in the wrong direction. It is also important to maintain that we need tax revenues in the member states because there is a bill to be paid. And if the tax base is eroded, we risk that it is the wage earners and welfare that will have to pay. So the crucial thing is how do we design these rules? Do these rules protect us against tax cheating and fraud, or are they rules that open up for it? That is really important to us. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) Arkadiusz MULARCZYK Mr. MP, I have a question: do you think that this proposed tax regime will not actually become the first step towards limiting the fiscal and financial sovereignty of the member states of the European Union? Is this not a stage aimed at tax harmonization, but in fact it is the first step to force other European Union countries in the future to also adopt such a form of taxation? Will this not lead to a situation in the future where it will limit the ability of European Union countries to pursue their own fiscal policy? Per CLAUSEN Thank you for that question. It is a very relevant question. There must be no doubt that I am opposed to making a harmonization of the tax system in the EU. I still believe that there must be national sovereignty in relation to that, and that will also be included in my assessment of the proposal which is up for adoption here today, which contains very, very many good and sensible elements. However, I agree that we run the risk that such a system can be used to hollow out the member states' sovereignty and ability to determine their own tax revenues themselves, and thus also have the opportunity to themselves decide the level of tax and the level of what should be in a country. Fabio DE MASI Madam President! Our companies are under pressure, not because of national taxation, but because energy prices are too high, because our infrastructure is dilapidated, and above all because large US tech corporations often pay less than 1% tax on their profits in Europe, while our SMEs pay up to 30% in the single market. I have my doubts as to whether we will get this problem under control by creating a 28th tax regime alongside the 27 national tax laws, which would then also allow Apple, Amazon, or Coca-Cola to pick the most attractive tax law in Europe in the future. Instead, we should have closer cooperation between the large member states—France, Spain, Italy; that is where Apple wants to sell its iPhone, not in the Caribbean or in Luxembourg—and finally enforce source taxes or punitive taxes on financial flows into tax havens. With that, we would fight back, also against the blackmail by Donald Trump; then the tech oligarchs would be on his doorstep, and we could protect our SMEs. Michalis HADJIPANTELA Madam President, Madam Commissioner, Europe's competitiveness does not depend solely on innovation. 27 different national authorities create towering obstacles, especially for small and medium-sized enterprises. Setting up a successful business with international growth potential requires a favorable and simple business environment. The 28th regime is the European response to the complexity of the single market. It is the possibility of setting up a company at the European level, in a single framework with less bureaucracy, simpler procedures, and greater legal certainty. It is imperative to create an environment that encourages innovation, promotes investment, and develops European businesses. The 28th regime is Europe's broader offering, so that innovative companies can secure access to financing, operate seamlessly regardless of borders, and secure a clear and predictable legal framework. The essential political message is that Europe needs increased simplification and stronger unity with a very clear orientation. One Europe, one single market. René REPASI Madam President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues! EU Inc. is an important proposal for our single market, and I am in full agreement with our colleague Niedermayer from the Christian Democrats on this. We must dare to have more single market. If we dare to have more single market, this means, on the one hand, more liberalization, but at the same time European protection standards. We truly do not need a competition in dumping where national protection standards and national tax laws are pitted against each other in competition, because only one party loses in that scenario—and that is the public interest. The dangers that arise for workers from unlimited competition between national legal systems are the same for tax legal systems, namely a race to the bottom. Ľudovít Ódor's report finds the right tone here: no discrimination in the tax sector for EU Inc., because otherwise the idea will end up in the trash can very quickly. But we also need clear protection standards so that there is no further harmful tax competition in our European Union. As the rapporteur for the legislative procedure, I expressly welcome the text. EU Inc. must become a quality seal and not another vehicle for dumping. Julie RECHAGNEUX Madam President, the 28th regime is not a simple tool of competitiveness, it is a real political project. It is the creation of a new European legal order, without a people, without a territory, but with its own rules. We are told that it will be optional, that national codes will not be abolished, but you know very well that they will gradually become useless. This is the new method of European integration: you no longer officially remove powers from member states, you organize their circumvention. Today, it is company law. Tomorrow it may be taxation, the day after tomorrow labor law, and it will always officially be in the name of competitiveness. You are fooling no one. As is often the case, it is a Federalist flight forward. European competitiveness will never be built against nations. It will be built with states free to decide their rules, their taxation, and their economic model. The European peoples have never voted for a 28th state and they do not want one any more today. Gheorghe PIPEREA Madam President, this 28th regime is a veiled federalization of the European Union. It is a project that defies the sovereignty of the European Union's nations and the principle of subsidiarity. Through the fiscal module added to the project, an attempt is also being made to bypass the unanimity principle in order to introduce the majority rule through the back door. The 28th regime means a set of parallel rules that large companies can choose when it suits them. What company would not prefer a fiscal and social regime that is favorable, more favorable? The harmonization of company law does not mean a legal, social, and fiscal regime that denies the legal systems of the 27 member states. The proposed fiscal model will undermine all 27 member states' tax regimes and, socially, will cause dumping, social dumping, and unemployment. Companies, labor law, and taxation must remain competences of the member states. Competitiveness cannot be reduced to a segment of companies that choose the 28th regime. Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA Madam President, Commissioner, according to the International Monetary Fund, Europe's internal barriers are equivalent to a cost similar to a 44% tariff for goods and 110% for services. A company that wants to grow in Europe faces 27 different legal frameworks, to which must be added regional disparities within the Member State itself. That means more costs, more time spent on regulatory compliance instead of innovating, investing, growing, and creating jobs. Madam President, Europe does not have a talent problem or a lack of ambition. There are too many obstacles and a lack of an environment that facilitates expansion and attracts investment. That is why the twenty-eighth regime represents an opportunity. Of course, it must be a voluntary, digital, flexible instrument that provides legal certainty and reduces administrative burdens. If we manage to reduce this fragmentation, attract more private capital, promote entrepreneurship, and allow our companies to be born, grow, and stay in Europe, this regime will have succeeded. (The speaker agrees to take a blue-card question) Bogdan RZOŃCA I would like to ask you a question because I liked your speech. You spoke a lot about investments. It is very important to me that the EPP notices this problem. Therefore, I would like to ask your opinion, because right now there is a group of countries in the European Union that state outright that if in the new budget for 2028-2034 we implement the principle of "do no significant harm to the natural environment", many industries in the European Union will not benefit from the budget. We will stop being competitive compared to China and India. What do you think about that? Are those who say that all industries should be allowed into the budget in the new perspective and access to it should not be restricted right? Isabel BENJUMEA BENJUMEA Your question is about the multiannual financial framework. I understand that you are referring to the European Competitiveness Fund. It is a debate that is open and it is not the debate we are having here. I am referring to the importance of attracting investments. One of the most important problems we have in Europe is the mobilization of private investment, both savings and attracting foreign investment for our companies. That is the reference I am making. An important debate remains, of course, around the financial framework, around the European Competitiveness Fund, how to structure it, what priorities it should have and to which priorities it should be allocated. And, of course, I will be delighted to have it with you when the time comes. Vytenis Povilas ANDRIUKAITIS Madam President, today we are debating the 28th regime for innovative start‑ups and scale‑ups. But underneath this report lies a bigger question: what do we do when 27 national tax systems slow down innovations? If we cannot have full taxation harmonisation, we need a common European layer so that our innovative start-up and scale-ups no longer have to fight 27 tax administrations to grow. It is a sensible answer. I ask all of us to remember it also when we discuss biotech, health and start-up issues. The same fragmentation is burdening a patient waiting for multi-country clinical trials, or an innovative company wanting to create new medicines. If a single base can serve our companies, it must also serve our people who need innovative medicines, available only through multi-country clinical trials. We know what to do. The question is whether we will act for innovative biotech start-ups today and for patients waiting for innovative treatment tomorrow. (The speaker agreed to take a blue-card question) Ondřej DOSTÁL Dear colleague, I heard your arguments. They are important, but I want to raise a question. My country's health system is very generous, but also highly dependent on taxes and social payments, which the companies pay according to our Czech law. Do you think you can guarantee that this new 28th tax regime would not deprive our nice national system of its income? Vytenis Povilas ANDRIUKAITIS My answer is clear: no. We need to understand now, and we need to encourage Member States to cooperate. Cross-border Healthcare Directive requires cooperation. An open method of coordination requires cooperation. Mutual recognition requires cooperation, and of course, also possibilities to encourage Member States to understand that a single market can deliver treatment to people and organise access to treatment. This is reality. We need to move into that direction. Antonella SBERNA Madam President, honourable colleagues, in our territories there are thousands of small businesses that every day waste time and resources on bureaucracy, instead of dedicating them to growing, hiring and innovating. The 28th regime must be forged as a tool aimed at simplifying the lives of those who invest, produce and create jobs. And this is the primary objective that we all share. But for it to be effective, the tool must remain voluntary, it must not create complexities that would otherwise become unmanageable for Member States and would therefore hinder the intentions that we all commonly have. Today, I think we must think about creating the conditions to increase European competitiveness and added value, and the text we are voting on today risks being a source of ideas that would instead deteriorate competences which it is dangerous to centralise and take away from national sectors. Harmonisation of tax bases, overcoming unanimity in tax matters, labour law and co-determination are all elements that risk derailing a noble and potentially very useful project. Therefore, I invite you to focus on what businesses are asking for, such as a European VAT number, a single digital register and, overall, streamlined and operational procedures. Let us not create obstacles to this path even before it takes off. Paulius SAUDARGAS Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, the European single market still feels like 27 separate islands when our companies try to scale. Europe is not losing competitiveness because we lack innovation, but because our market is too fragmented. Different rules, different forms and procedures, different tax systems. The 28th regime could be a flexible solution. My home country, Lithuania, has already proven that a flexible regulatory environment creates a massive competitive advantage. Look at our fintech sector: in 2018 it was just starting, and by 2025, over 250 companies were thriving. We had what European companies need. One trusted digital entry point. A single legal company form valid across the entire Union. Clear rules and a unified tax base for cross-border activities. Let's listen to them. Let's make it easier for European companies to grow at home, not elsewhere. Rihards KOLS Madam President, my dear colleagues, a single market and 27 company law systems. That fragmentation costs European businesses the equivalent of 44 % tariff on goods and 110 % on services inside our single market. We tax ourselves out of our own market then act surprised when our start-ups found themselves in Texas instead of Riga. That is the broken infrastructure we need to fix not qualified majority tax rules. So let's simplify: one digital registration, one rulebook for companies scaling everywhere in the EU. That is the actual precondition to competitiveness. This file does not stand alone. It sits alongside EU inc., insolvency rules and one more pillar that matters: European business wallets – one digital identity instead of 27 separate logins. Today, an SME expanding abroad spends on average EUR 10 000 and 14 weeks on paperwork. Get the wallet right and that time and cost falls by roughly half, saving businesses some EUR 150 billion a year. Real benefits, no Member State loses its tax base, and every founder who left for Texas gets a reason to come home. Arba KOKALARI Madam President, building a company in Europe today means 27 rule books. Unfortunately, many see it as 27 reasons to move to the US. So we need to make it easier for European companies to stay in Europe. We must make it easier for them to scale in Europe and not just scale the paperwork. That is the ambition that we should set for 'EU Inc.': one European company form, one rule book, one single market. 'EU Inc.' companies must also offer good employee stock option programmes and be easy to list in European stock markets. We have a unique chance to make Europe a single market for real – that will make us competitive globally and that's what's going to make Europe rich and prosperous in the future. So let's make 'EU Inc.' happen and let's make it easier to become an entrepreneur in Europe. Karlo RESSLER Madam President, Commissioner, dear colleagues, without bold innovations, without new investments and without a real single market, Europe is, unfortunately, only a sleeping economic giant that is strong in its potential, but slow and sluggish in a world that will not wait for us. Therefore, the proposal for a single, simpler European framework for business growth is one of the most important, but also one of the most positive proposals of this term. This means a voluntary, digital and clear legal framework, from the establishment of a company in a maximum of 48 hours, through standardized forms and easier attraction of capital, to doing business and growing throughout Europe without 27 different barriers. This would dramatically improve the business environment and remove unnecessary barriers and reduce the administrative burden with additional legal certainty. The price of fragmentation today is enormous. The burden is sometimes greater than the largest and highest tariffs. Europe has the knowledge, it has the people, it has the capital and it can no longer afford for ideas to be born here and companies to be registered somewhere else. (The speaker agreed to reply to a blue-card question.) Lukas SIEPER Thank you, colleague, for accepting my blue card. You rightfully said that we have a lot of potential. I am sure you are also aware of the exceptions to the basic freedoms of the internal market that national Member States can impose. Do you think that, as long as these exceptions still exist, like 'EU Inc.' can really work? Or should we not think even further to dig out our potential? Karlo RESSLER Thank you for the question. I think that we should definitely think and move beyond only this proposal. You were mentioning the exceptions that do exist. I wouldn't put them all in the same category, so I think that we should really make a smart choice, but in general I think that it is quite clear that really Europe has the knowledge, Europe has the people, and Europe has the potential to do it. We can do it because I think, in this case, that we have to have also one rulebook for those who want to scale up, and this is something that we will do with this proposal. Wouter BEKE Mr President, today innovative companies run up against 27 national systems, 27 registers, 27 legal thresholds. Who wants to grow? As a result, the European Union loses a great deal of time, capital, potential. And Europe has talent. We have talent, we have knowledge, we have drive. But scaling up is far too difficult. Fellow Member Andriukaitis referred to the biotech regulation and I completely agree with that. I have previously called the proposal for the 28th regime administrative simplification squared, but then it must be much more ambitious. It must not remain an empty box, no extra layer on top of the 27 national regimes, because then we might as well stop right away. Commissioner, that is why I also ask you: let us get to work on a 28th regime with a truly supranational framework, one European register, low costs and minimum capital, robust harmonization of corporate rules, digital procedures that can work in the same way everywhere, and access to the specialized European commercial court. Let us not start from fear or national reflexes. What I have heard here: on the far-right side they say: “But we are not going to give up national rules.”; on the far-left side they say: “Yes, but that might give us less revenue.” Do you know who the biggest victim of this is? That is the European consumer: €4,000 per year we can return to the consumer. Through this we can create economic growth and we can ensure that innovation and capital can remain here in Europe. (The speaker agrees to take a "blue card" question) Maria GRAPINI of the "blue card". – Sure, you said that we have an extreme need for this single European framework, but do you think it can only work if we institute this single framework now, as long as we have, for example, 27 public procurement systems? Because we asked, the Parliament, and the Council blocked it. We asked for a regulation. We have 27 laws for late payments. Again, it is blocked at the Council. How do you think we should harmonize everything so that we have a single framework? Otherwise, an entrepreneur, especially an SME, will have to know 27 (...) (The President withdrew the speaker's floor) Wouter BEKE "blue card" answer. - Yes, I completely agree with your analysis, but that is no reason at all not to go for a 28th regime. That is an even greater reason to say: let us be more ambitious in the economic field, to harmonize what needs to be harmonized. If we can do Europe a huge service for our economic growth - and that means for our prosperity, for our socio-economic market model - it is economic harmonization. Seán KELLY Madam President, my colleague Ressler said Europe was a sleeping giant. And this is a sleep that is self-inflicted because of overregulation etc. So now we need to wake up and get rid of the sleeping tablets. I think the report by Mario Draghi has been followed through very sensibly by the Commission in relation to omnibuses and now the 28 tax regime. But also crucial to that is investment money, and that can come from the savings and investment union, which is a priority for the Irish Presidency over the next six months. And if we get the cooperation we need and require, then the billions of euros that citizens have in banks, sleeping there, losing money for them, can be utilised to create the investment that will help us to not only research, but also innovate, scale up and manufacture in Europe, and that will benefit all of us. Juan Fernando LÓPEZ AGUILAR Madam President, Madam Commissioner, the twenty-eighth regime —EU Inc.— is an ambitious objective: to create harmonized rules for the constitution, governance, and capital structures of innovative companies consistent with what the Letta and Draghi reports propose —with which this term began— and, furthermore, to do so by means of a regulation, meaning it would only require a qualified majority in the Council. Well, this Parliament not only clearly supports it, but wants to lead this initiative. But we must be aware of its difficulties, because we will do so concurrently with the absence of fiscal harmonization —which continues to belong to the Member States as a competence—, labor harmonization —likewise 27 different regimes— and, also, despite the fact that company registration is harmonized, it will coexist with 27 different registry models in the Union. Therefore, the objective is plausible, but we must be aware of the difficulties. What must be achieved is that the legislative outcome lives up to the proclaimed ambition. Sebastian TYNKKYNEN Mr President, this house cannot get over its green craze. When discussing the simplification of cross-border business taxation, entries from the red-green party program are being dragged in through the same door. Namely, in connection with this simpler tax system, it is proposed as the position of the European Parliament that green innovation should be able to receive temporary additional deductions or tax payment deferrals. I ask, why on earth does this green innovation need all these deferrals, additional deductions, and state subsidies that you are constantly pushing? Could it be that green projects cannot survive in competition and therefore must be supported by all possible means. Europe is still waiting for that green growth that you have promised for years. Realism is to stop waiting for it and start respecting market economy principles, which are not built on the foundation of green subsidy dance. Cynthia NÍ MHURCHÚ Mr President, as Ireland takes over the Presidency of the Union, strengthening Europe's competitiveness is a major priority. Therefore, I welcome this report by MEP Ódor, rapporteur from my own political group, Renew Europe, and I thank him for the in-depth study he has carried out on the 28th tax regime which is optional - optional for our SMEs. Start in Europe, grow in Europe, stay in Europe and do not leave home. The fragmented market in Europe has not been working for our SMEs for a long time, but rather it has been working against them. I commend this optional European framework to harmonize the various incorporation, financing, investment, insolvency, legal, labor and tax systems, while recognizing the political sensitivity surrounding tax matters at the national level of the Member States. Nikola MINCHEV Madam President, Madam Commissioner, dear colleagues, obstacles to businesses, cross-border operations and expansion constitute a major hurdle to an effective single market. We complain a lot about the 15 % US tariffs, but we tend to forget that existing barriers in our own single market account to much more. And yes, a single business code would be a game changer. Today, a company expanding across Europe must navigate different tax procedures, authorities and reporting requirements. This is where the 28th regime can make a practical difference by simplifying this procedure through a one-stop shop, a single interface and stronger coordination between tax authorities. But if a company can register under one European framework and still has to navigate a different national rules every time it hires, raises capital or expands into a new market, we will have changed the rulebook without changing the reality of doing business in Europe. The question is simple: will this regime remove complexity or merely add another layer of it? Let's do our best to achieve the first, because its success will ultimately depend on whether companies can operate more easily across our single market and compete more effectively. Petras GRAŽULIS Madam President, esteemed Commissioner. In pursuit of a single market, I believe that we should also standardise taxes. In Lithuania, the value added tax is one of the highest in the European Union. In particular, the value added tax is high on food products. In many European Union countries, the value added tax on food products is much lower, but no exceptions are made for this in Lithuania. I believe it is necessary to seek that the value added tax on food products has a zero rate, especially for essential food products. I have repeatedly suggested, as a Member of the European Parliament, that these taxes be lower, but unfortunately neither the one nor the other government would agree. Does the European Union not think that it is necessary to reduce taxes on food products? Especially since in Lithuania there is a very large wealth disparity and nearly 20 percent of people are impoverished. Maria ZACHARIA Madam Commissioner, I call on you to withdraw this proposal. The so-called 28th regime is not an innocent administrative change. It is a dangerous door for letterbox companies, social dumping and the weakening of collective rights. The European Trade Union Confederation ETUC itself warns that there are no binding guarantees for workers. The European Trade Union Institute warns that it paves the way for competition at the expense of wages and rights. We say no to the "race to the bottom". If the Commission believes that workers' rights are not at risk, then explicitly enshrine in the regulation that the labor law and collective agreements of the country where the worker actually works will always apply. Until binding guarantees are enshrined for every worker, our position is clear: Withdraw this proposal. Dubravka Šuica Madam President, honourable Members, thank you for your valuable remarks and for your recognition that this proposal is a good step in the right direction. 'EU Inc.' is a corporate‑law proposal, which is part of a broader strategy to strengthen the competitiveness of the European economy. Yes, we want to remove complexities and we want to simplify but not lower our standards in combating tax evasion. We will ensure fair taxation and a level playing field, and maintain a high level of protection against tax fraud. The objective is to enable companies to operate under a single, harmonised set of EU‑wide rules, instead of having to navigate different corporate‑law frameworks of the Member States. We commend the fact that the European Parliament recognises 'EU Inc.' as a strategic step forward towards a further deepening and improvement of the single market and competitiveness. We also acknowledge the Parliament's general call for further legislative actions related to the 28th regime. We are ready to listen to the businesses and work together with the Member States to create an environment in which companies can thrive. Thank you for your exchange, and all the best. Ľudovít ÓDOR Madam President, first, I wanted to thank all the shadow rapporteurs and also MEPs for the lively debate. I think it also showed that this is an important topic. Second, I wanted to highlight maybe three issues which are really important, and I felt a little bit of misunderstanding in the plenary. The first one, the regime is optional. It is optional not only for the companies but also for the Member State to opt into this regime. So, this is not forcing targeted harmonisation among Member States. The second one, it is not mainly about tax revenues, since start-ups and scale-ups usually generate at the beginning of their life very, very limited revenues. The third one is that it is important to highlight that we are not an isolated island somewhere in the Pacific, but we need to be competitive internationally. What are the benchmarks internationally? If you look at the situation in the US, they have a special regime for scale-ups, start-ups and innovative companies. It is called the Delaware regime. I do not advocate to simply copy that situation, mainly because of worker rights and others, but still, we need one regime for having scale in Europe, because what is the alternative? If we are not able to create big companies, globally competitive companies, if we are not able to utilise the full single market, then of course somebody else will decide about our future. And that is at least not what I want for the future of Europe. So, thank you once again very much for the constructive discussion. Christel SCHALDEMOSE (Chair) The debate is closed. The vote will be held today. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading
2026-07-09		A10-0167/2026	Vote details Motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position aiming to boost EU competitiveness by exploring a 28th optional EU-wide business tax regime. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position to explore a 28th EU-wide business tax regime for boosting competitiveness. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 366 192 39 121
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-09		B10-0339/2026	Joint communication on humanitarian aid (JOIN(2026)0025) Discussion transcript Joint communication on humanitarian aid (JOIN(2026)0025) Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Sophie WILMÈS (Chair) The next vote is on the joint communication on humanitarian aid (JOIN(2026)0025) (see minutes, item 9.9). NICOLAE ȘTEFĂNUȚĂ:Vicepreșed PRESIDENCY: NICOLAE STEFANUTA Vice-President European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion Resolution motion
2026-07-09		B10-0339/2026	Vote details Amendment 2 · After paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · After paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph condemning humanitarian aid blockades and forced displacement, and calling for EU sanctions against responsible non-EU actors. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's demand for the EU and Member States to impose sanctions on non-EU actors blocking humanitarian aid or causing forced displacement. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 255 315 19 129 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 4 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a requirement for the EU to use all diplomatic and economic leverage and measures against states or individuals obstructing EU humanitarian aid delivery. What a Yes vote means Would add that the EU must use all political and economic leverage and measures against those obstructing EU humanitarian aid delivery. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 279 259 54 126 Amendment 6 · paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a specific condemnation of double-tap strikes targeting humanitarian workers in conflicts like Ukraine, Gaza, and Lebanon to Parliament's resolution on humanitarian aid. What a Yes vote means Would add a condemnation of double-tap strikes targeting aid workers in conflicts including Ukraine, Gaza, and Lebanon. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 283 216 83 136 Amendment 13 · Recital D Plain-language guide Amendment 13 · Recital D This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add religious extremism and persecution of Christians to the humanitarian aid resolution's context. What a Yes vote means Would add risks from religious extremism and the persecution of Christians to the resolution. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 238 251 88 141 Amendment 15 · Recital K Plain-language guide Amendment 15 · Recital K This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace part of the humanitarian aid resolution to make EU support conditional on cooperation regarding illegal migration, smuggling prevention, and migrant returns. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament’s draft text to condition EU support on cooperation in preventing illegal migration, combating smuggling, and returning non-qualifying persons. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 208 347 19 144	Procedure Resolution motion Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		B10-0337/2026	Objection pursuant to Rule 114(3): Trajectory to decrease the contribution of high indirect land-use change-risk biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels to renewable energy targets Discussion transcript Objection pursuant to Rule 114(3): Trajectory to decrease the contribution of high indirect land-use change-risk biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels to renewable energy targets Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The first vote is on the objection pursuant to Rule 114(3): Trajectory to decrease the contribution of high indirect land-use change-risk biofuels, bioliquids and biomass fuels to renewable energy targets (see minutes, item 10.1). Dubravka Šuica Mr President, honourable Members, I would like to encourage honourable Members to support the Commission Delegated Act on indirect land-use change and to vote against the tabled objection. In the latest review, it was found that both palm oil and soy beans qualify as feedstock with a high risk of indirect land-use change and therefore the Commission was obliged to revise the delegated act accordingly. This Delegated Act is supported by robust scientific analysis and latest available data and is legally required by the legislative framework agreed by the co-legislators. Updating the scientific data to determine which feedstocks are classified as high risk is also needed for the EU to comply with the findings in two WTO dispute settlement cases, and the WTO. Should the Delegated Act be blocked, then the EU risks being subject to substantial sanctions, which could target our agricultural exporters. It is important to underline that the categorisation of soy beans as high-ILUC risk feedstock does not represent a ban. Member States are still free to promote and support biofuels, including from soy beans, as they consider most appropriate. Only the amount of fuels that is counted towards the targets in the Renewable Energy Directive is gradually reduced until 2030. I would also like to stress that only a small share of biodiesel consumed in the EU is produced from soybeans and the vast majority of it is grown in third countries. Therefore, although some operators in the EU may need to adapt, the economic impact of classifying soya as high ILUC on EU producers and crushing industry should remain limited because the EU livestock sector continues to rely on soyabean and there are alternative outlets for soya oil, including food, feed and industrial uses. Strong global demand and high soyabean oil prices, together with possible lower EU imports and export opportunities, should further help limit negative effects on suppliers and the soya industry. Independently from that, work is currently ongoing on ways to review the low ILUC-risk certification procedure, so that producers of soy beans that receive such certification will be exempted from the categorisation of a feedstock as high-ILUC risk, and we will further assess in setting-up the renewable energy framework for the decade ahead how we can further support domestic biofuel production as well as the farming sector. European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion
2026-07-08		B10-0337/2026	Vote details Amendment 4 · After paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a critique of the Commission's soy methodology and economic risks for agricultural supply chains. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's assessment that soy models lack accuracy and threaten agricultural supply chains. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 188 456 2 72 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a provision stating that EU-grown soy should be classified as low ILUC-risk due to no deforestation impacts, while preventing competitive disadvantages for EU operators. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision classifying EU-grown soy as low ILUC-risk and protecting EU agricultural competitiveness. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 188 462 2 66 Amendment 6 · After paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · After paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a requirement for a comprehensive economic impact assessment for feedstock classification changes exceeding 1.4 billion euros and calls to limit broad delegated powers to the Commission. What a Yes vote means Would add that feedstock changes over 1.4 billion euros need impact assessments and limits broad Commission delegated powers. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 189 465 2 62 Amendment 7 · paragraph 3, introductory part Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · paragraph 3, introductory part This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add an impact assessment and stakeholder consultation requirement to Parliament’s call for a revised EU biofuel delegated act. What a Yes vote means Would add that the Commission must conduct an impact assessment and consultations before submitting a revised EU biofuel delegated act. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 188 465 2 63 Amendment 1 · Recital B Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · Recital B This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add that EU soy does not generate negative land-use impacts and meets stringent environmental standards. What a Yes vote means Would add that EU soy complies with high standards and improves farming resilience. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 201 464 3 50 Amendment 2 · After recital G Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · After recital G This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital criticizing the Commission for using delegated acts for substantive policy changes rather than technical adjustments. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital stating that delegated powers lack democratic scrutiny for significant economic and political decisions. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 190 464 3 61 Amendment 3 · After recital M Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · After recital M This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital stating that first-generation biofuels play an important role in transport and should be recognized rather than constrained. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital recognizing the role of first-generation biofuels and stating that limits risk harming EU biofuel value chains and consumer prices. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 204 455 3 56 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position to object to a delegated act on high indirect land-use change-risk biofuels, and prioritizes decreasing their contribution to renewable energy targets. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the delegated act on high ILUC-risk biofuels and reducing their renewable energy contribution. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 388 248 24 58	Procedure Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		B10-0344/2026	Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3), and (4)(c): Lead in certain fishing tackle Discussion transcript Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3), and (4)(c): Lead in certain fishing tackle Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3), and (4)(c): Lead in certain fishing tackle (see minutes, item 10.2). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion
2026-07-08		B10-0344/2026	Vote details Motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position to object to limits on lead in fishing tackle. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position objecting to limits on lead in fishing tackle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 197 455 7 59	Procedure Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0181/2026	EU–Mexico Political, Economic and Cooperation Strategic Partnership Agreement Discussion transcript EU–Mexico Political, Economic and Cooperation Strategic Partnership Agreement Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the EU–Mexico Political, Economic and Cooperation Strategic Partnership Agreement (see minutes, item 10.3). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Plenary report Plenary report Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0181/2026	Vote details Javi López, Borja Giménez Larraz – Proposal for a Council decision Plain-language guide Javi López, Borja Giménez Larraz – Proposal for a Council decision This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's consent to the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement, updating bilateral political, economic, and cooperation rules. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's consent to the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement and strengthen bilateral cooperation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 479 119 65 55
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		A10-0182/2026	EU–Mexico Political, Economic and Cooperation Strategic Partnership Agreement (Interim report) Discussion transcript EU–Mexico Political, Economic and Cooperation Strategic Partnership Agreement (Interim report) Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the EU–Mexico Political, Economic and Cooperation Strategic Partnership Agreement (interim report) (see minutes, item 10.4). European Parliament record
2026-07-08		A10-0182/2026	Vote details Amendment 18 · paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 18 · paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 18 to paragraph 5 of the EU-Mexico partnership report involves official wording that is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace paragraph 5 of the draft report with official wording that is currently unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 122 534 13 49 Amendment 19 · After paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 19 · After paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace part of paragraph 5 of the EU-Mexico partnership report, but the exact amendment wording is unavailable in the official sources. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text in paragraph 5 of the report, though the specific wording of the amendment text is not provided in official records. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 108 548 9 53 Amendment 11 · paragraph 16 Plain-language guide Amendment 11 · paragraph 16 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace part of paragraph 16 to state that official amendment wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace text with the officially unrecorded amendment proposal for paragraph 16. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 190 470 3 55 Amendment 20 · paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 20 · paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the EU-Mexico partnership agreement draft position, but the official amendment wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text with the missing amendment. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 88 491 87 52 Amendment 21 · After paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 21 · After paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add after paragraph 33 of the EU-Mexico partnership report, noting the official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the amendment after paragraph 33 in the EU-Mexico partnership report. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 159 474 29 56 Amendment 22 · paragraph 34 Plain-language guide Amendment 22 · paragraph 34 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace part of paragraph 34 in the EU-Mexico partnership report, but the exact amendment wording is unavailable in official sources. What a Yes vote means Would replace part of paragraph 34 in the EU-Mexico partnership report. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 190 437 36 55 Amendment 12 · After paragraph 34 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · After paragraph 34 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 12 after paragraph 34 of the EU-Mexico partnership report addresses tariff removal for agricultural and sensitive sectors, though the exact amendment text is unavailable in official sources. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision regarding agricultural tariffs and sensitive sectors in the EU-Mexico agreement, though the specific text is missing from official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 207 432 9 70 Amendment 13 · After paragraph 34 Plain-language guide Amendment 13 · After paragraph 34 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an amendment after paragraph 34 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report concerns text whose official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text in the draft position after paragraph 34, though the exact substantive wording is officially unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 192 436 16 74 Amendment 14 · After paragraph 34 Plain-language guide Amendment 14 · After paragraph 34 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 14 to the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report concerns an insertion after paragraph 34, but the exact official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add an amendment regarding the EU-Mexico partnership agreement whose specific official text is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 201 429 13 75 Amendment 23 · paragraph 36 Plain-language guide Amendment 23 · paragraph 36 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an amendment concerning the EU-Mexico partnership agreement requires all Mexican imports to fully comply with EU food safety, environmental, and product standards, modifying Parliament's draft position. What a Yes vote means Would replace the amendment text to mandate strict EU standard compliance for all Mexican imports, though official wording remains unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 228 384 54 52 Amendment 24 · paragraph 37 Plain-language guide Amendment 24 · paragraph 37 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace part of paragraph 37 of the EU-Mexico partnership report draft, though the exact amendment wording is unavailable in official sources. What a Yes vote means Would replace part of paragraph 37 of the EU-Mexico partnership report draft with text whose official wording is unavailable in sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 114 491 61 52 Amendment 25 · After paragraph 37 Plain-language guide Amendment 25 · After paragraph 37 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 25 after paragraph 37 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report addresses digital trade and market access provisions, though the exact official amendment text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text regarding digital trade provisions in the EU-Mexico partnership agreement draft position. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 107 538 16 57 Amendment 26 · paragraph 38 Plain-language guide Amendment 26 · paragraph 38 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote concerns paragraph 38 of the EU-Mexico partnership report regarding critical raw materials, where the exact text of amendment 26 is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace or modify the draft position on Mexico's critical raw materials and supply chains in paragraph 38. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 100 551 15 52 Amendment 27 · paragraph 40 Plain-language guide Amendment 27 · paragraph 40 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a specific energy chapter to the EU-Mexico agreement to secure legal certainty and renewable investments. What a Yes vote means Would add an explicit energy chapter requirement to protect renewable energy investments and legal certainty. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 43 513 108 54 Amendment 28 · paragraph 41 Plain-language guide Amendment 28 · paragraph 41 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 28 to the EU-Mexico partnership report addresses public procurement transparency and market access, though the specific amendment wording is unavailable in the official source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace part of the European Parliament draft position with text whose exact wording is unavailable in the official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 127 484 52 55 Amendment 29 · paragraph 44 Plain-language guide Amendment 29 · paragraph 44 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a reference to intellectual property rights protections for EU innovators, creative industries and artists in Mexico. What a Yes vote means Would add IP protections for EU innovators, creative industries and artists in Mexico exceeding WTO TRIPS standards. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 148 500 18 52 Amendment 30 · paragraph 45 Plain-language guide Amendment 30 · paragraph 45 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace investment protection rules in the EU-Mexico partnership report, noting unavailable official amendment text. What a Yes vote means Would replace investment rules in the report draft using unavailable amendment text. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 119 503 41 55 Amendment 1 · paragraph 45 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · paragraph 45 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote addresses paragraph 45 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report regarding investment protection and the new Investment Court System, though the exact text of Amendment 1 is unavailable in official sources. What a Yes vote means Would replace paragraph 45 provisions based on the unlisted text of Amendment 1 regarding the EU-Mexico investment framework. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 117 536 13 52 Amendment 31 · After paragraph 45 Plain-language guide Amendment 31 · After paragraph 45 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 31 regarding the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement targets an insertion after paragraph 45, though the official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add an amendment whose specific official text and substantive effect are unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 118 518 23 59 Amendment 32 · paragraph 48 Plain-language guide Amendment 32 · paragraph 48 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official wording of Amendment 32 to paragraph 48 of the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement report is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace text at paragraph 48, though the exact substantive content of the amendment is not provided in the source documents. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 131 520 12 55 Amendment 33 · paragraph 49 Plain-language guide Amendment 33 · paragraph 49 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a specific amendment to paragraph 49 of the EU-Mexico partnership report, though the exact official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the amendment to paragraph 49 regarding the EU-Mexico partnership report, noting the exact official text is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 114 539 12 53 Amendment 34 · paragraph 50 Plain-language guide Amendment 34 · paragraph 50 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 34 concerning paragraph 50 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement interim report lacks accessible official text, so the exact wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace paragraph 50 with text whose official wording is unavailable in the provided sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 110 549 11 48 Amendment 35 · After paragraph 50 Plain-language guide Amendment 35 · After paragraph 50 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The exact official wording for Amendment 35 after paragraph 50 is unavailable, so this vote concerns the text following paragraph 50 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement interim report. What a Yes vote means Would add or replace text after paragraph 50 in the EU-Mexico interim report draft position. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 94 559 7 58 Amendment 3 · paragraph 51 Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · paragraph 51 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace part of paragraph 51 to alter the trade and sustainable development review terms, noting the official amendment text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text with an alternative review term, though the specific wording is not provided in official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 121 533 7 57 Amendment 15 · paragraph 51 Plain-language guide Amendment 15 · paragraph 51 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the EU-Mexico partnership agreement trade review timeline, though official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text with an unspecified amendment, though official text is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 188 470 7 53 Amendment 36 · After paragraph 52 Plain-language guide Amendment 36 · After paragraph 52 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The amendment proposes a change after paragraph 52 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report, though the specific wording is unavailable in the official source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision after paragraph 52 concerning the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report, based on unavailable official wording. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 233 386 37 62 Amendment 37 · paragraph 54 Plain-language guide Amendment 37 · paragraph 54 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 37 to paragraph 54 of the EU-Mexico partnership interim report concerns the establishment of domestic advisory groups for trade and sustainable development; the exact amendment wording is unavailable in the official source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text with the text of amendment 37, the exact wording of which is unavailable in the official sources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 123 536 8 51 Amendment 38 · paragraph 56 Plain-language guide Amendment 38 · paragraph 56 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on amendment 38 to paragraph 56 of the EU-Mexico partnership agreement report concerns monitoring the agreement, with the official wording unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text with the amendment, though the official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 131 518 15 54 Amendment 39 · paragraph 59 Plain-language guide Amendment 39 · paragraph 59 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add text to paragraph 59 of the EU-Mexico partnership report, but the exact official wording of amendment 39 is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add the text specified in amendment 39 to paragraph 59 of the report, subject to the official wording. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 185 417 60 56 Amendment 5 · After recital A Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After recital A This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add text after recital A regarding the EU-Mexico agreement, but the official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add text after recital A regarding the EU-Mexico agreement, but the official wording is unavailable in the source bundle. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 103 461 93 61 Amendment 6 · Recital E Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · Recital E This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description For Recital E, Amendment 6 official text is unavailable in the official source bundle. What a Yes vote means Would add the missing text for Recital E. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 185 477 2 54 Recital F Plain-language guide Recital F This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a note that the EU-Mexico partnership agreement modernises bilateral ties and strengthens democratic values, human rights, and trade cooperation. What a Yes vote means Would add that the EU-Mexico partnership agreement modernises bilateral ties and strengthens democratic values, human rights, and trade cooperation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 457 138 66 57 Recital G Plain-language guide Recital G This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Recital G of the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement interim report acknowledges Mexico's role as a key regional partner and its commitment to shared democratic values. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position supporting cooperation with Mexico on trade, democracy, and human rights. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 434 216 13 55 Amendment 16 · After recital J Plain-language guide Amendment 16 · After recital J This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description The official wording of Amendment 16 after recital J of the interim report on the EU-Mexico agreement is unavailable in official sources. What a Yes vote means Would add the missing text for Amendment 16 after recital J as listed in the parliamentary report. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 118 538 11 51 Amendment 17 · After recital M Plain-language guide Amendment 17 · After recital M This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 17 after recital M in the interim report on the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement affects Parliament's draft position, but the official wording is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add the text for Amendment 17 after recital M in the interim report on the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement, though the exact wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 129 529 8 52 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the EU-Mexico Strategic Partnership Agreement and sets priorities for trade, human rights, and political cooperation. It establishes Parliament's stance on strengthening bilateral ties and monitoring implementation. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position on the EU-Mexico partnership, prioritizing strengthened bilateral cooperation, trade relations, and human rights oversight. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 388 161 120 49
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0198/2026	EU–Mexico Interim Agreement on Trade Discussion transcript EU–Mexico Interim Agreement on Trade Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the EU–Mexico Interim Agreement on Trade (see minutes, item 10.5). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Opinion Plenary report · 1st reading Plenary report Plenary report Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0198/2026	Vote details Draft Council decision Plain-language guide Draft Council decision This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the EU-Mexico Interim Agreement on Trade, setting priorities for bilateral trade rules and economic cooperation. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and trade cooperation priorities. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 474 131 60 53
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0156/2026	Protection of the environment through criminal law Discussion transcript Protection of the environment through criminal law Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the protection of the environment through criminal law (see minutes, item 10.6). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0156/2026	Vote details Draft Council decision Plain-language guide Draft Council decision This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This whole-motion vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on a Draft Council decision regarding the protection of the environment through criminal law. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position on the Draft Council decision concerning the protection of the environment through criminal law. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 499 99 69 51
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0177/2026	EU–Morocco Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement: accession to the EU of Croatia (Protocol) Discussion transcript EU–Morocco Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement: accession to the EU of Croatia (Protocol) Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the EU–Morocco Euro-Mediterranean Aviation Agreement: accession to the EU of Croatia (Protocol) (see minutes, item 10.7). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0177/2026	Vote details Draft Council decision Plain-language guide Draft Council decision This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position to consent to Croatia joining the EU-Morocco aviation agreement. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position consenting to Croatia joining the EU-Morocco aviation agreement. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 625 16 20 57
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0151/2026	EU-Morocco Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation setting out the terms and conditions for the participation of Morocco in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA): amendment and supplement Discussion transcript EU-Morocco Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation setting out the terms and conditions for the participation of Morocco in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA): amendment and supplement Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the EU-Morocco Agreement for scientific and technological cooperation setting out the terms and conditions for the participation of Morocco in the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area (PRIMA): amendment and supplement (see minutes, item 10.8). Paolo BORCHIA Mr President, honourable colleagues, we are proceeding with a vote that represents a technical alignment for Morocco's participation in PRIMA, the Partnership for Research and Innovation in the Mediterranean Area, with a focus on water, agriculture, and food security. This vote will guarantee its continuity until 2031, with no budgetary implications. I also take this opportunity to thank my colleagues on the ITRE Committee, who voted for the measure in committee almost unanimously. That being said, however, I would like to broaden the reflection to the topic of agriculture, given that we cannot look at an agreement with Morocco without extending our vision to a broader framework of relations, particularly on the agricultural front. In the last two months of 2025 alone, Morocco covered over 70% of extra-EU imports regarding tomatoes, a flow that has quadrupled over the last twenty years. Therefore, this report would also like to open a reflection on the issue that the Commission should monitor the implementation of these types of agreements, even those referring to research and innovation, with particular attention to agricultural imports, so that the principles of reciprocity and fair competition are respected. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-08	Consent	A10-0151/2026	Vote details Draft Council decision Plain-language guide Draft Council decision This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position to conclude the EU-Morocco agreement for scientific cooperation in Mediterranean research. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position supporting the EU-Morocco scientific cooperation agreement. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 573 35 37 73
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08	Tracked	A10-0172/2026	2025 Commission report on Ukraine Discussion transcript 2025 Commission report on Ukraine Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine (see minutes, item 10.9). Jacek OZDOBA Mr President! We propose an amendment in the following wording (I will read it right now): "The European Parliament demands memory for the 100,000 brutally murdered Poles and Jews in the Volhynian slaughter; firmly rejects the cult of bandits from the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and Stepan Bandera, who are responsible for genocide and cooperation with Hitler; calls on the Ukrainian authorities to immediately cease their state commemoration and glorification; cultivating the memory of genocide perpetrators is contrary to morality and European values; therefore, we call on the Ukrainian authorities to unequivocally reject the glorification of persons responsible for genocide; emphasizes that Banderite ideology is a mirror image of Nazi ideology and - like Nazism - Banderism must be recognized as a banned ideology in the European Union." Gilles PENNELLE Mr President, the prospect of Ukraine's accession to the European Union would constitute a major threat to our nations' agriculture. Our farmers have already been suffering the consequences since 2022. The liberalization of Ukrainian agricultural imports, which only the Patriots group fought against from the very start, has led to the massive influx of sugar, cereals, and poultry onto the European market, to the detriment of our producers' incomes. Yet the Commission wants to go further. In its new vegetable protein strategy presented yesterday, it confirms its abandonment of the ambition to see European agriculture satisfy our needs for vegetable protein, in order to worsen imports from Ukraine. I therefore propose the following amendment to create a new paragraph 32: "stresses that the Commission, in its latest protein strategy, proposes to rely on Ukraine's agricultural production capacity to remedy the shortage of vegetable protein in the Union, instead of favoring the development of European production". Petras AUŠTREVIČIUS Mr President, colleagues, let me move the following oral amendment: 'Welcomes the valuable talks between the Ministers for Foreign Affairs of Poland and Ukraine, held in Warsaw on 3 July, which demonstrated the goodwill of both sides to resolve the existing tensions before they develop into a crisis; calls for an open and constructive dialogue between the Polish and Ukrainian authorities, historians and civil societies in order to restore the indispensable trust between the two countries.' Sergey LAGODINSKY Mr President, I would like to draw your attention to some of the chants that were uttered here from that side of the Chamber, when somebody dared to stand in opposition to one of the oral amendments. People – colleagues – were called Nazis just because they dared to have a different position on something, which is very sensitive, but we do not share the style of calling each other Nazis. Some of the real Nazis... (Protests) Some of the real Nazis who are present in this Chamber are never called as such during the sessions here. I have never heard anyone call each other that. I would like to ask you to identify and to sanction those who are attacking their colleagues just for their opinion here, who dare to oppose that amendment. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) Colleague, we take note of your remarks. We will check the recording. It's very important to respect the Rules of this House. Colleague, on the same item? If we open the same item, it will be too much. Raphaël GLUCKSMANN Mr President, on the same subject, but not at the time of the same vote, the colleague who sits at seat number 286, I believe, or 288, made an obscene gesture - made an obscene gesture! - at the time of the vote. That gesture was directed towards this part of the assembly. And that is deeply unbearable! You have the right to be Vladimir Putin's relays in this chamber, but do not behave like Russian fascists! Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) Colleagues, please all respect this House and respect ourselves. We take note of all the remarks. We will give the floor for one more intervention. Petr BYSTRON Mr President! Above all, thank you very much to the colleague from Germany who speaks out against colleagues being called Nazis here, because Mr Brandstätter, your kindred spirit, called me, a Czech refugee, “the friendly face of National Socialism” yesterday. I strongly reject that, and I think that should be penalised. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) Colleagues, we take note of all the remarks, and I want to assure you that in the Bureau of this House, the issue of respecting the Rules of the House has been discussed. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading
2026-07-08	Tracked	A10-0172/2026	Vote details Amendment 9 · After paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 9 · After paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EU to prioritize UN and OSCE peace diplomacy and international dialogue with global powers to end the war. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the EU and member states to prioritise UN and OSCE-led diplomatic peace talks with international actors. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: framing diplomacy as an alternative to collective security support for Ukraine could benefit Russia. 105 493 62 58 Amendment 53 · After paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 53 · After paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for the EU to prioritize diplomatic efforts for peace in Ukraine and leaves security commitments to individual member states while noting taxpayer costs. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the EU to prioritize diplomatic peace efforts and state that security commitments are national decisions. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: framing diplomacy as an alternative to collective security support for Ukraine could benefit Russia. 128 514 13 63 Paragraph 13 Plain-language guide Paragraph 13 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine calls on Member States to significantly step up and accelerate military support, arms, and ammunition deliveries to Ukraine. What a Yes vote means Would urge Member States to significantly step up and accelerate the delivery and financing of arms and ammunition to Ukraine. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 433 101 114 70 Paragraph 14 Plain-language guide Paragraph 14 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Ukraine urges Germany to send long-range Taurus missiles and calls on Member States to provide additional air defence systems. What a Yes vote means Would urge Germany to send Taurus missiles and Member States to provide air defence systems. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 435 162 54 67 Paragraph 17 Plain-language guide Paragraph 17 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds Parliament's condemnation of diplomatic efforts that pressure Ukraine into territorial concessions or conditional security guarantees. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's condemnation of diplomatic efforts that pressure Ukraine into territorial concessions. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 441 119 95 63 Paragraph 18, part 3 Plain-language guide Paragraph 18, part 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Ukraine security guarantees urges the EU and member states to provide robust legally binding support to deter Russian aggression. What a Yes vote means Would urge the EU and member states to contribute to robust legally binding security guarantees for Ukraine. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 456 104 86 72 Paragraph 18, part 4 Plain-language guide Paragraph 18, part 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine calls for binding security guarantees, a multinational reassurance force, and a defensive air protection zone to deter Russian aggression and support Ukraine's sovereignty. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position calling for robust security guarantees, a reassurance force, and air protection for Ukraine. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 440 167 40 71 Amendment 11 · paragraph 20 Plain-language guide Amendment 11 · paragraph 20 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the draft position to call for closer cooperation among Baltic Member States authorities to stop Russia's shadow fleet operations. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text to demand closer cooperation between Baltic Sea Member States authorities to stop Russian shadow fleet operations. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 573 46 41 58 Paragraph 21 Plain-language guide Paragraph 21 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment condemns restrictions on Ukrainian athletes at the Milano Cortina 2026 Games and the return of Russian athletes and artists in international events, urging EU visa bans for Russian nationals who do not distance themselves from the war. What a Yes vote means Would urge the EU and Member States to enforce competition law and prevent EU visas for Russian athletes and artists failing to distance themselves from the war. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 462 133 56 67 Amendment 12 · After paragraph 21 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · After paragraph 21 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph opposing any exclusion of military-age Ukrainians from EU temporary protection or conditioning it on military service. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's demand that EU member states unconditionally apply temporary protection without linking it to military service rules. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 108 509 40 61 Amendment 13 · After paragraph 23 Plain-language guide Amendment 13 · After paragraph 23 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call to cancel Ukraine's foreign debt to enable recovery and prevent future economic dependence. What a Yes vote means Would add the demand for the cancellation of Ukraine's foreign debt to support recovery and avoid economic dependence. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 113 549 5 51 Paragraph 24, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 24, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine calls for a multiannual financial framework and a Reparations Loan using immobilised Russian assets to fund Ukraine. What a Yes vote means Would adopt Parliament position calling for predictable multiannual financial support and a Reparations Loan funded by immobilised Russian assets. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 528 92 37 61 Paragraph 24, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 24, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Within the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine, this vote calls on the EU to use immobilised Russian assets for a dedicated Reparations Loan and transfer them to a special-purpose vehicle to fund Ukraine's recovery and defence. What a Yes vote means Would adopt Parliament's position urging the EU to establish a Reparations Loan using immobilised Russian assets to fund Ukraine's recovery and defence. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 444 152 54 68 Amendment 54 · After paragraph 25 Plain-language guide Amendment 54 · After paragraph 25 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add that Ukraine accession must be strictly merit-based without shortcuts. What a Yes vote means Would add that Ukraine accession must follow strict merit-based criteria without shortcuts. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 190 450 13 65 Amendment 55 · After paragraph 26 Plain-language guide Amendment 55 · After paragraph 26 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a warning that Ukraine's weak rule of law risks importing corruption and weakening the EU. What a Yes vote means Would add a formal statement declaring Ukraine's institutional capacity and economic stability insufficient for accelerated accession. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 172 452 29 65 Amendment 56 · After paragraph 26 Plain-language guide Amendment 56 · After paragraph 26 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a paragraph stating that Ukraine's EU accession threatens EU agricultural, cohesion, migration, and border security policies. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's concern that Ukraine's EU accession would harm EU policies and increase border security and migration risks. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 123 515 10 70 Paragraph 27, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 27, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This whole-motion vote approves Parliament's non-binding position that EU enlargement is a merit-based geostrategic investment and that Ukraine's integration is a strategic priority. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position that EU enlargement is a merit-based geostrategic investment and that Ukraine's integration is a strategic priority. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 607 11 25 75 Paragraph 27, part 3 Plain-language guide Paragraph 27, part 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine reaffirms that enlargement is a geostrategic investment and moral obligation, declaring Ukraine's future in the EU as a strategic priority. What a Yes vote means Would adopt Parliament's non-binding position affirming Ukraine's future in the EU as a strategic priority and a mutually beneficial investment in peace and security. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 424 162 71 61 Paragraph 27, part 4 Plain-language guide Paragraph 27, part 4 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine reaffirms that EU enlargement is a merit-based geostrategic investment and moral obligation, stressing that Ukraine's future lies in the EU and recognising its integration as a strategic priority. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position recognising Ukraine's European integration as a strategic priority for the Union and a merit-based geostrategic investment in peace. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 417 192 43 66 Amendment 19 · paragraph 29 Plain-language guide Amendment 19 · paragraph 29 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace Parliament’s call to open Ukraine negotiating clusters with a demand to block cluster openings until Ukraine recognises historical UPA and wartime atrocities against Poles and Jews. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament’s call for immediate opening of Ukraine negotiating clusters with a strict precondition demanding official recognition of historical mass atrocities. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 173 437 34 74 Paragraph 29, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 29, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the Council to open all EU negotiating clusters with Ukraine immediately, starting with the fundamentals cluster. What a Yes vote means Would add a formal call urging the Council to immediately open all negotiating clusters with Ukraine, starting with fundamentals. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 433 143 77 65 Paragraph 29, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 29, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine welcomes the screening process completion and calls on the Council to immediately open all EU negotiating clusters starting with the fundamentals cluster. What a Yes vote means Would urge the Council to act immediately to open all EU negotiating clusters for Ukraine, starting with the fundamentals cluster. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 426 172 58 62 Amendment 33 · paragraph 30 Plain-language guide Amendment 33 · paragraph 30 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add welcoming the opening of the first fundamental cluster of accession negotiations and expecting subsequent clusters to follow suit. What a Yes vote means Would add welcoming the first fundamental cluster's opening and expecting subsequent clusters to follow suit. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 428 164 65 61 Amendment 4 · After paragraph 31 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After paragraph 31 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph warning that Ukraine's EU accession would disrupt the internal market, lower agricultural prices, and strain the common agricultural policy budget. What a Yes vote means Would add concerns that Ukraine's EU accession would disrupt internal agricultural markets and reduce support for farmers across the EU. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 202 432 19 65 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 31 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 31 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Stresses that Ukraine's accession requires a prior economic impact assessment on the EU internal market. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for a prior economic impact assessment before Ukraine's accession progress continues. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 188 438 10 82 Amendment 6 · After paragraph 31 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · After paragraph 31 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new point noting concerns that Ukrainian agricultural standards and mega-farm concentration differ from European family farming. What a Yes vote means Would add concerns regarding differing agricultural standards and land concentration in Ukraine compared to European family farming. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 194 436 16 72 Amendment 14 · After paragraph 31 Plain-language guide Amendment 14 · After paragraph 31 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a paragraph to Parliament's report on Ukraine requiring an impact assessment on EU cohesion and agricultural funds before enlargement. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for a formal budgetary impact assessment on EU funds and regions prior to Ukraine's accession. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 190 422 39 67 Amendment 35/1 · After paragraph 32 Plain-language guide Amendment 35/1 · After paragraph 32 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a statement regretting Ukraine's renaming of an elite military unit after the UPA, calling for bilateral historical reconciliation. What a Yes vote means Would add a statement addressing historical sensitivities and calling for renewed efforts toward bilateral reconciliation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 592 42 11 73 Amendment 35/2 · After paragraph 32 Plain-language guide Amendment 35/2 · After paragraph 32 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for de-escalation over the naming of a Ukrainian military unit after the UPA, citing historical sensitivities and European values. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for de-escalation regarding historical sensitivities over the naming of a Ukrainian military unit after the UPA. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 379 229 35 75 Amendment 35/3 · After paragraph 32 Plain-language guide Amendment 35/3 · After paragraph 32 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a paragraph criticizing Ukraine for naming a military unit after the UPA. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for de-escalation regarding historical grievances and military unit naming. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 590 11 37 80 Amendment 35/4 · After paragraph 32 Plain-language guide Amendment 35/4 · After paragraph 32 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a paragraph criticizing Ukraine for naming a military unit after the UPA, calling it unprovoked and harmful to Poland relations. What a Yes vote means Would add a statement condemning the military unit naming decision as contrary to European values and urging renewed reconciliation efforts. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 478 121 52 67 Amendment 35/5 · After paragraph 32 Plain-language guide Amendment 35/5 · After paragraph 32 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a paragraph criticizing Ukraine for renaming a military unit after the UPA, citing the Volhynia massacre and urging de-escalation and historical reconciliation. What a Yes vote means Would add criticism of Ukraine over historical UPA unit naming and call for reconciliation regarding the Volhynia massacre. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 600 11 38 69 Amendment 20 · paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 20 · paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add demands for Ukraine to denounce historical UPA ideology, acknowledge past mass crimes, and conduct exhumations. What a Yes vote means Would add conditions regarding historical memory, exhumations, and condemnation of wartime groups to Parliament's report position. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 201 409 39 69 Amendment 57 · After paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 57 · After paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a note on Ukrainian refugees under temporary protection, welcomes limiting protection for draft-evading men of military age, calls on them to return, and encourages Member States to adapt asylum and reception policies. What a Yes vote means Would add a new paragraph welcoming limits on temporary protection for Ukrainian men of military age who left unlawfully and calls on them to return. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 120 481 55 62 Amendment 58/1 · After paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 58/1 · After paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a paragraph recalling Polish aid to Ukrainian refugees and condemning Ukraine naming a military unit after the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the exhumation of Volhynia massacre victims and stress it as essential for Polish-Ukrainian reconciliation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 167 463 30 58 Amendment 59 · After paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 59 · After paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph condemning Nazi names and symbols in Ukraine's armed forces, urging textbook revisions for reconciliation, and stating praise of collaborators makes EU membership impossible. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's condemnation of Ukrainian military symbols, textbook review requests, and a condition blocking EU membership. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: portraying current Ukrainian forces as Nazi-linked could delegitimise Ukraine and benefit Russia. 127 469 53 69 Paragraph 41 Plain-language guide Paragraph 41 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Within the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine, this amendment insists that Ukraine receive EU assistance to counter foreign information manipulation during elections, similar to Moldova. What a Yes vote means Would add a demand that Ukraine receive EU assistance in countering foreign information manipulation during post-war elections, similar to Moldova. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 517 102 43 56 Amendment 61 · After paragraph 52 Plain-language guide Amendment 61 · After paragraph 52 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for OLAF to better monitor Ukraine EU funds and for auditors to audit all EU financial assistance since 2022. What a Yes vote means Would add stricter oversight, audits, and transparency rules for EU financial assistance and reconstruction funds provided to Ukraine. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 143 459 59 57 Amendment 62 · After paragraph 52 Plain-language guide Amendment 62 · After paragraph 52 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a requirement that Ukraine show verified anti-corruption and transparency progress before its EU accession talks advance. What a Yes vote means Would add a condition suspending Ukraine's EU accession steps until measurable anti-corruption and transparency progress is verified. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: obstructing Ukraine's EU integration could benefit Russia. 126 506 16 70 Amendment 39 · After paragraph 60 Plain-language guide Amendment 39 · After paragraph 60 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for Ukraine to end the public glorification of the UPA faction linked to the Volhynia massacre. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for Ukraine to end the public glorification of historical groups responsible for civilian crimes. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 166 444 35 73 Amendment 21 · After paragraph 61 Plain-language guide Amendment 21 · After paragraph 61 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a statement to the Ukraine report declaring the Ukrainian Insurgent Army aligned with Nazi ideology and its glorification incompatible with EU values. What a Yes vote means Would add a formal statement characterizing the Ukrainian Insurgent Army as Nazi-aligned and its glorification incompatible with European values. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 191 414 47 66 Amendment 22 · After paragraph 61 Plain-language guide Amendment 22 · After paragraph 61 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a new paragraph expressing concern over reports of Ukrainian refugee youth displaying Nazi and UPA symbols and stresses historical education. What a Yes vote means Would add concern over refugee youth displaying Nazi and UPA symbols and stress historical education and condemnation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 181 411 51 75 Paragraph 62, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 62, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment to the 2025 Ukraine report welcomes civil law reforms, urges civil partnership legal recognition, and protects minority rights. What a Yes vote means Would urge Ukraine to adopt draft law no 9103 on civil partnerships and ensure reforms protect LGBTIQ+ rights. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 456 144 40 78 Amendment 63 · After paragraph 65 Plain-language guide Amendment 63 · After paragraph 65 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a condemnation of alleged religious persecution against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by Ukrainian authorities to the Parliament's report on Ukraine. What a Yes vote means Would add a condemnation of alleged religious persecution against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church by Ukrainian authorities to Parliament's position. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: claims of persecution of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church could delegitimise Ukraine and benefit Russia. 95 523 38 62 Amendment 16 · After paragraph 66 Plain-language guide Amendment 16 · After paragraph 66 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for Ukrainian authorities to stop state-level commemoration of historical groups like the OUN and UPA and prioritize historical reconciliation. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for Ukrainian authorities to end state-level commemoration of historical figures and groups implicated in war crimes and pursue historical reconciliation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 222 397 43 56 Paragraph 71 Plain-language guide Paragraph 71 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Underlines accelerating Ukraine’s integration into the EU single market as economic support against Russian aggression, recommending 10 priorities from the DCFTA action plan. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position prioritising Ukraine’s single-market integration and DCFTA priorities to support its economy against Russian aggression. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 422 164 70 62 Amendment 17 · After paragraph 71 Plain-language guide Amendment 17 · After paragraph 71 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a requirement for the Commission to assess social impacts on rural communities and enforce land transparency before agricultural market integration. What a Yes vote means Would add a mandatory social impact assessment and land transparency rules prior to further agricultural market integration. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 218 421 14 65 Paragraph 78 Plain-language guide Paragraph 78 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine stresses enhancing military mobility, logistics, and infrastructure in border regions to support Ukrainian defence and deterrence. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position urging targeted investments and logistical frameworks in border regions to support Ukraine’s military mobility and defence. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 498 132 23 65 Paragraph 80 Plain-language guide Paragraph 80 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment instructs the Commission to integrate Ukraine's wartime experience into EU security policies. What a Yes vote means Would urge the Commission to integrate Ukraine's wartime experience into EU security policies. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 517 106 21 74 Paragraph 83 Plain-language guide Paragraph 83 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Paragraph 83 of the Ukraine report urges all member states to phase out dependencies on Russian energy supplies and infrastructure. What a Yes vote means Would urge all member states to phase out dependencies on Russian energy supplies and infrastructure. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 500 129 22 67 Paragraph 99 Plain-language guide Paragraph 99 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Paragraph 99 of the Ukraine report calls for intensified EU support for Ukraine's energy system to ensure resilience, security, and long-term recovery. What a Yes vote means Would urge the EU and its Member States to intensify predictable energy support and long-term sector recovery mechanisms for Ukraine. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 527 83 38 70 Paragraph 101, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 101, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine supports the strategic nuclear reactor sale from Bulgaria to Ukraine, regional energy connectivity, and joint infrastructure initiatives to integrate Ukraine's energy system into the EU. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position supporting the nuclear reactor sale, energy connectivity, and joint transport and infrastructure initiatives between Bulgaria and Ukraine. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 447 130 78 63 Paragraph 102 Plain-language guide Paragraph 102 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine encourages the Commission to consult with Ukraine on temporary Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism exemptions for war-impacted industries. What a Yes vote means Would urge the Commission to consult with Ukraine on temporary Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism exemptions for war-impacted industries. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 435 178 42 63 Amendment 18 · After paragraph 108 Plain-language guide Amendment 18 · After paragraph 108 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add concern over Zaporizhzhia attacks, urge halting military action near the plant, and call for UN peacekeepers and IAEA cooperation. What a Yes vote means Would add Parliament's call to halt military action near Zaporizhzhia and deploy UN peacekeepers. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 104 470 87 57 Amendment 49 · After recital L Plain-language guide Amendment 49 · After recital L This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital claiming units of the Ukrainian Armed Forces use Nazi symbols and names linked to WWII atrocities. What a Yes vote means Would add a statement alleging current Ukrainian military units use Nazi symbols and historical collaboration names. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: portraying current Ukrainian forces as Nazi-linked could delegitimise Ukraine and benefit Russia. 158 459 38 63 Amendment 50 · After recital L Plain-language guide Amendment 50 · After recital L This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital calling on the Selection Committee of the European Order of Merit to revoke Volodymyr Zelenskyy's membership following concerns raised over historical unit naming. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the Selection Committee of the European Order of Merit to revoke Volodymyr Zelenskyy's membership. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 130 484 34 70 Amendment 51/1 · After recital L Plain-language guide Amendment 51/1 · After recital L This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital on historical textbooks in Ukraine to Parliament's report. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital asserting that 2023 10th-grade history textbooks relativise historical crimes and glorify the UPA. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 159 452 41 66 Amendment 1 · After recital M Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · After recital M This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital warning that Ukraine's EU integration and CAP budget cuts could reduce support for current member state farmers by twenty percent. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital warning that Ukraine's integration and budget cuts risk reducing farmers' support and removing CAP budgetary autonomy. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 185 436 16 81 Amendment 2/1 · After recital M Plain-language guide Amendment 2/1 · After recital M This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital stating that war, loans, and sanctions cause high energy costs and burdens, and that fast-tracked Ukraine accession harms EU interests. What a Yes vote means Would add a critical assessment of sanctions, financial burdens, and Ukraine accession speed to the report. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 131 500 6 81 Amendment 2/2 · After recital M Plain-language guide Amendment 2/2 · After recital M This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote amends Parliament's report on Ukraine to state that sanctions, loans and Ukraine's accession burden EU citizens and citizens' interests are not served by accelerated accession. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital asserting that sanctions, loans and accelerated Ukrainian accession harm EU citizens and businesses. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 164 459 24 71 Amendment 3 · Recital N Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · Recital N This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace Parliament's draft position on Ukraine's EU accession by stating it must be assessed strictly on merit without preferential treatment or accelerated procedures. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft text to require Ukraine's EU accession to be assessed strictly on merit without preferential treatment or accelerated procedures. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 185 453 8 72 Amendment 52 · After recital Q Plain-language guide Amendment 52 · After recital Q This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a recital detailing Ukrainian anti-corruption investigations into energy sector kickbacks involving state officials. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital on anti-corruption probes in Ukraine's energy sector. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 160 462 34 62 Amendment 7 · After recital V Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · After recital V This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital warning that Ukraine’s EU accession would create major budgetary costs for the Common Agricultural Policy and cohesion policy. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital highlighting the financial costs of Ukraine’s EU accession on EU agricultural and cohesion funds. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 211 425 27 55 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine. It prioritizes continued political, financial, and security support for Ukraine and its path toward EU integration. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position on the 2025 Commission report on Ukraine and its priorities for ongoing support and reform. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 460 136 59 63
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		A10-0164/2026	2025 Commission report on Moldova Discussion transcript 2025 Commission report on Moldova Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the 2025 Commission report on Moldova (see minutes, item 10.10). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading
2026-07-08		A10-0164/2026	Vote details Amendment 10 · After paragraph 48 Plain-language guide Amendment 10 · After paragraph 48 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call to end Moldova's EU accession process to prevent importing an unresolved frozen conflict and Russian military presence into the EU. What a Yes vote means Would add a call to immediately halt Moldova's EU accession to avoid bringing a frozen conflict and Russian military presence into the European Union. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: obstructing Moldova's EU integration over Russian military or frozen-conflict claims could benefit Russia. 108 535 8 67 Amendment 11 · After paragraph 51 Plain-language guide Amendment 11 · After paragraph 51 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EU to pursue alternative partnership frameworks with Moldova focused on economic, trade, and security cooperation rather than full membership. What a Yes vote means Would add a directive for the EU to prioritize alternative partnership frameworks focused on economic, trade, and security cooperation over full EU membership for Moldova. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 99 545 14 60 Amendment 12 · After paragraph 52 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · After paragraph 52 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add opposition to EU fund transfers to Moldova under the Reform and Growth Facility and call to halt them. What a Yes vote means Would add opposition to EU fund transfers to Moldova under the Reform and Growth Facility and call to halt them. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: cutting dedicated EU financial support could weaken Moldova’s resilience, benefiting Russia. 102 537 8 71 Amendment 7 · After recital B Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · After recital B This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital noting that Russian forces in Transnistria pose a security risk that the EU should not adopt through premature Moldova membership. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital stating the unresolved Transnistrian conflict is a security risk the EU should not make its own via premature membership. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: obstructing Moldova’s EU integration over Russian military or frozen-conflict claims could benefit Russia. 79 576 8 55 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the 2025 Commission report on Moldova. It sets out Parliament's priorities for Moldova's EU integration and reforms. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and central priorities regarding Moldova's EU integration path and reforms. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 505 115 45 53
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		A10-0163/2026	2025 Commission report on Serbia Discussion transcript 2025 Commission report on Serbia Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the 2025 Commission report on Serbia (see minutes, item 10.11). Helmut BRANDSTÄTTER I will have this oral amendment, but first I have to tell you and I will do it in German – according to Rule 180, I must have the possibility to say that what he just said is not true. Yesterday I said: There is a German member of the Bundestag from the AfD named Matthias Helferich, and he once described himself as "the friendly face of National Socialism". Matthias Helferich, member of the German Bundestag, AfD. Exactly that is what I said yesterday. I did not say it to Mr Bystron, and therefore he has now spoken an untruth. I would ask you, Mr President, to give Mr Bystron the opportunity to apologise for his untruth. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading
2026-07-08		A10-0163/2026	Vote details Amendment 1 · paragraph 20 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · paragraph 20 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace Parliament's draft position by opposing the suspension of pre-accession funds for Serbia, arguing it would harm the population and push the country toward non-European investors. What a Yes vote means Would replace the call to suspend funds for Serbia with opposition to financial suspension, stating it penalises the vulnerable and risks pushing Serbia toward non-European investors. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 113 514 22 69 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on Serbia's EU integration progress, focusing on rule of law, media freedom, and regional cooperation. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position on Serbia's EU reform progress, emphasizing fundamental rights and democratic standards. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 468 116 79 55
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		B10-0333/2026	The impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls, and the crimes committed by Turkish forces and consequences on gender equality Discussion transcript The impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls, and the crimes committed by Turkish forces and consequences on gender equality Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls, and the crimes committed by Turkish forces and consequences on gender equality (see minutes, item 10.12). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion
2026-07-08		B10-0333/2026	Vote details Amendment 15 · After paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 15 · After paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a note on the ongoing division of Cyprus 52 years after the Turkish invasion, calling it a violation of international law and EU values. What a Yes vote means Would add a note on the ongoing division of Cyprus 52 years after the Turkish invasion and its violation of international law. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 194 445 7 72 Paragraph 2, part 1 Plain-language guide Paragraph 2, part 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding resolution examining the enduring impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls, addressing related crimes and consequences for gender equality. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position detailing the impacts of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls and addressing gender equality consequences. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 628 18 11 61 Paragraph 2, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 2, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This whole-motion vote approves Parliament's non-binding position and focuses on addressing the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls, including crimes committed by Turkish forces and consequences for gender equality. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position addressing the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls and gender equality consequences. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 567 41 50 60 Amendment 8 · After paragraph 2 Plain-language guide Amendment 8 · After paragraph 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Stresses that all 1974 conflict victims and survivors are entitled to truth, justice, reparations, and guarantees of non-repetition. What a Yes vote means Would add a new paragraph requiring accessible reparations and rejecting the instrumentalisation of survivors for nationalist narratives. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 243 384 27 64 Paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women supports Parliament's position demanding accountability and remedies. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position prioritizing accountability for crimes against Cypriot women and gender equality. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 615 33 3 67 Amendment 9 · After paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 9 · After paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add that Cyprus conflict militarisation diverts funds from social services and demands demilitarisation and women's roles. What a Yes vote means Would add that the Cyprus conflict militarisation diverts resources from social policies and requires demilitarisation and women's leadership. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 234 367 51 66 paragraph 9 – Am 1, 11,/1 Plain-language guide paragraph 9 – Am 1, 11,/1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment broadens the rape survivor medical services to include full sexual and reproductive health rights like abortion and contraception. What a Yes vote means Would replace the rape medical services call with specific sexual and reproductive health and rights services. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 453 141 45 79 paragraph 9 – Am 1, 11,/2 Plain-language guide paragraph 9 – Am 1, 11,/2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace Parliament's draft position to demand that EU member states provide survivors of rape with comprehensive sexual and reproductive healthcare services. What a Yes vote means Would replace the clinical management reference with specific access to emergency contraception, abortion services, and infection treatment. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 484 78 61 95 paragraph 9 – Am 1, 11,/3 Plain-language guide paragraph 9 – Am 1, 11,/3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace medical services for rape survivors with full sexual and reproductive healthcare, including contraception, safe abortion and STI treatment. What a Yes vote means Would replace medical services with comprehensive sexual and reproductive healthcare for rape survivors. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 488 68 68 94 Amendment 12 · After paragraph 9 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · After paragraph 9 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for an EU-wide definition of rape based on consent and urges member states to update their national laws accordingly. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for EU-level rape legislation based on consent and national law reforms aligned with the Istanbul Convention. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 489 142 14 73 Amendment 13 · After paragraph 14 Plain-language guide Amendment 13 · After paragraph 14 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for Türkiye to provide effective compensation to victims and survivors of conflict-related sexual violence and serious violations from the 1974 invasion. What a Yes vote means Would add a formal request for Türkiye to compensate victims of sexual violence and serious violations from the 1974 invasion. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 348 282 26 62 Amendment 14 · After paragraph 19 Plain-language guide Amendment 14 · After paragraph 19 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for Türkiye to grant full access to 1974 invasion records and cooperate on conflict violations. What a Yes vote means Would add a demand for Türkiye to provide unhindered access to 1974 records and cooperate on conflict-related crimes. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 358 166 122 72 Amendment 16 · After paragraph 22 Plain-language guide Amendment 16 · After paragraph 22 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for Türkiye to obey international law and UN resolutions, and for stronger EU action to end Cyprus's occupation. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for Türkiye to follow international law and UN resolutions, and for stronger EU action to end Cyprus's occupation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 196 423 17 82 Recital B Plain-language guide Recital B This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women addresses gender equality consequences and crimes committed by forces. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position addressing gender equality consequences and crimes against women from the 1974 invasion. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 625 7 25 61 Amendment 2 · After recital C Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · After recital C This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital recognising the equal suffering, displacement and trauma experienced by women and girls from all communities in Cyprus following the events of 1974. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital ensuring equal recognition, dignity and support for women and girls from all communities affected by the 1974 events and intercommunal violence in Cyprus. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 374 233 45 66 Amendment 4 · After recital I Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After recital I This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital stating that widespread impunity for rape contributes to rape culture. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital stating that widespread impunity for rape contributes to rape culture. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 383 239 34 62 Amendment 5 · After recital I Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After recital I This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital stating that sexual and gender-based violence is used as a tool of terror and social control in global conflicts. What a Yes vote means Would add a new recital on the systematic use of sexual and gender-based violence in conflicts. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 274 323 51 70 Amendment 6 · Recital J Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · Recital J This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the reference to the Greek Orthodox Church with broader societal actors and religious institutions contributing to reconciliation, trauma healing, and gender equality in Cyprus. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament’s draft text to broaden the scope of societal actors promoting reconciliation, dialogue, and gender equality in Cyprus. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 292 348 10 68 Recital J Plain-language guide Recital J This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position detailing the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and the consequences for gender equality. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position highlighting the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and gender equality. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 337 273 46 62 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position and addresses the impact of the 1974 Turkish invasion on Cypriot women and girls, crimes committed by Turkish forces, and consequences on gender equality. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position addressing the 1974 Turkish invasion's impact on Cypriot women and girls and gender equality. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 575 33 43 67	Procedure Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		B10-0335/2026	Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 Discussion transcript Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize NK603 × T25 (see minutes, item 10.13). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion
2026-07-08		B10-0335/2026	Vote details Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the authorization of genetically modified maize NK603 × T25, prioritizing health and environmental protection. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the authorization of genetically modified maize NK603 × T25. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 460 189 14 55	Procedure Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		B10-0334/2026	Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified soybean MON 87705 Discussion transcript Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified soybean MON 87705 Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Victor NEGRESCU (Chair) The next vote is on the objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified soybean MON 87705 (see minutes, item 10.14). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion
2026-07-08		B10-0334/2026	Vote details Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This whole-motion vote approves Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the marketing authorization of genetically modified soybean MON 87705, urging the European Commission to withdraw its draft implementing decision. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the authorization of genetically modified soybean MON 87705. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 466 175 16 61	Procedure Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-08		B10-0336/2026	Objection pursuant to Rule 115(2) and (3): Genetically modified maize DP202216 x NK603 x DAS-40278-9 and its sub-combinations DP 202216 x NK603, DP202216 x DAS-40278-9	Procedure Resolution motion
2026-07-08		B10-0336/2026	Vote details Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the authorization of genetically modified maize DP202216 x NK603 x DAS-40278-9. It calls on the European Commission to withdraw its authorization proposal to protect consumer health and the environment. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position objecting to the authorization of genetically modified maize products. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 417 167 15 119	Procedure Resolution motion
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07	Second reading	C10-0178/2026	Temporary derogation from certain provisions of the ePrivacy Directive to combat online child sexual abuse Discussion transcript Temporary derogation from certain provisions of the ePrivacy Directive to combat online child sexual abuse Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The first vote is on the request by the EPP Group for an urgent decision on the temporary derogation from certain provisions of the ePrivacy Directive to combat online child sexual abuse (see minutes, item 7.1). I give the floor first to Tomas Tobé to speak in favour of the urgent decision. Tomas TOBÉ Madam President, dear colleagues, today's vote is not about party politics. Today's vote is not about majority tactics or strategy. Today's vote is not about shared control. It is not even about procedures. It is much more important than that. Today's vote is about deciding if we want to protect our children, or if we want to protect sexual predators. Madam President, in March, we collectively failed to protect children. But in April, this House, together, clearly urged the Commission to come up with measures to close the legal gap that we currently have. The Commission has acted, and 26 out of 27 Member States have agreed. Colleagues, we have a unique chance right now to send a clear signal – we care. We care about our children, and we will protect them because behind every child that is exposed on sexual abuse materials online is a victim that is never heard, and an offender that is never brought to justice. Without the interim regulation, 99 % of child abuse material goes undetected. This is unacceptable. We cannot go to summer recess knowing that our children are not protected. So I say to all you colleagues, please take responsibility today. Vote today in favour of the urgent resolution to protect children on Thursday. And then we continue our work together on the permanent regulation. Vote to protect children. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) I give the floor now to Mary Khan to speak against. Mary KHAN Madam President! Summer, sun, mass surveillance. That is how some EU elites imagine the start of the summer holidays. Shortly before the break, a surveillance structure is supposed to be pushed through quickly. And that, even though Parliament has already rejected chat control. Now the exact same proposal is simply being warmed up again. In this august House of democracy, votes apparently continue to be held until the result fits. You all know very well that there is no majority for permanent chat control. That is why they are now trying, together with the Council, to revive the whole thing through the back door; that is why, as so often, they are once again choosing the salami-slicing tactic. Translated, this means: private messages are to be made technically searchable, images, videos and even texts automatically checked. The fact that an attempt is being made today to push the whole thing through via an urgency motion clearly shows the spirit of this project. Since 2021, Ursula von der Leyen has been trying to gain access to our private messages. She herself cannot disclose her SMS: everyone knows what was going on on our continent in 2021 during the time of the corona measures. And of course – this argument does not hold water, I am a mother myself – of course we all want to protect children. But real child protection does not begin with putting every citizen under general suspicion. Real child protection begins where perpetrators genuinely become dangerous: with harsh sentences instead of probation; open perpetrator registries are needed; with better law enforcement and the dismantling of grooming gangs. Anyone who handles child molesters with kid gloves but wants to put millions of citizens under general suspicion is deliberately setting the wrong priorities. And to every citizen: every citizen can see today, and should also do so, which MEP voted today to make their private messages searchable in the future. Look closely! Remember the names! Every MEP who votes for this urgency motion is also voting for mass surveillance. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · Partial vote · 1st reading Adopted text · Partial vote · 1st reading · Summary Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary Adopted text · 2nd reading Adopted text · 2nd reading · Summary
2026-07-07	Second reading	C10-0178/2026	Vote details Request for an urgent decision Plain-language guide Request for an urgent decision This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote speeds up Parliament’s timetable so the temporary ePrivacy Directive exception for combating online child sexual abuse can be decided sooner; it does not decide whether that exception takes effect. What a Yes vote means Would speed up Parliament’s timetable for deciding the ePrivacy Directive exception; it does not approve the underlying rule itself. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 331 304 11 72
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		B10-0343/2026	Amending the decision of 18 December 2024 on setting up a special committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union, extending its term of office and adjusting its responsibilities Discussion transcript Amending the decision of 18 December 2024 on setting up a special committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union, extending its term of office and adjusting its responsibilities Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on amending the decision of 18 December 2024 on setting up a special committee on the Housing Crisis in the European Union, extending its term of office and adjusting its responsibilities (see minutes, item 7.3). European Parliament record	Procedure Resolution motion Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		B10-0343/2026	Vote details Amendment 4 · paragraph 2, point c Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · paragraph 2, point c This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the housing committee's mandate to require maintaining EU social and environmental standards when simplifying renovation and permitting rules. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement to uphold EU social and environmental standards during the upcoming 2027 housing simplification procedure. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 113 521 21 63 Amendment 5 · paragraph 2, point f Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · paragraph 2, point f This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add housing market speculation impact to the construction sector barriers assessed by the EU Housing Crisis committee. What a Yes vote means Would add housing market speculation impact to the construction sector barriers assessed by the EU committee. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 115 516 21 66 Amendment 6 · paragraph 2, point h Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · paragraph 2, point h This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add causes to the EU housing committee's mandate to analyse financialisation practices and speculation. What a Yes vote means Would add the analysis of causes of financialisation and speculation to the EU housing committee's mandate. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 112 529 15 62 Amendment 7 · paragraph 2, point p Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · paragraph 2, point p This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on Amendment 7 adds tenant organisations to the expert meetings of the Housing Crisis committee to support the EU Affordable Housing Plan. What a Yes vote means Would add tenant organisations to the committee expert meetings supporting the EU Affordable Housing Plan. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 128 481 43 66 Amendment 3 · Recital D Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · Recital D This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the committee's focus on private property and squatting with tenants' rights, housing assistance, and measures against financialisation and speculation. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament's draft position to prioritize tenants' rights, housing assistance, and combatting housing financialisation over private property and squatting. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 110 516 31 61 Amendment 1 · Recital D Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · Recital D This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the housing crisis committee's focus on squatting with money laundering and criminal activities affecting housing availability and rights. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament's draft position to prioritize money laundering and criminal activities in housing over squatting. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 130 490 35 63
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07	Conciliation	A10-0191/2026	Air passenger rights Discussion transcript Air passenger rights Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on air passenger rights (see minutes, item 7.7). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Amendments Opinion Plenary report · 1st reading Plenary report · 1st reading · Summary Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 2nd reading Adopted text · 2nd reading Adopted text · 2nd reading · Summary Plenary report · Conciliation Adopted joint text · Conciliation Adopted joint text · Conciliation · Summary
2026-07-07	Conciliation	A10-0191/2026	Vote details Joint text Plain-language guide Joint text This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament’s non-binding position on air passenger rights, aiming to strengthen traveler compensation rules, clarify carrier obligations, and improve enforcement mechanisms. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position, establishing stronger passenger compensation rules and clearer carrier obligations. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 646 12 3 57
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07	First reading	A8-0386/2018	Coordination of social security systems Discussion transcript Coordination of social security systems Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on the coordination of social security systems (see minutes, item 7.8). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Plenary report · 1st reading Plenary report · 1st reading · Summary Provisional agreement Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07	First reading	A8-0386/2018	Vote details Amendment 209 · Provisional agreement Plain-language guide Amendment 209 · Provisional agreement This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the EU regulation text to continue modernising social security coordination rules for long-term care, unemployment, and family benefits. What a Yes vote means Would replace the text to advance the modernisation of EU social security coordination rules for long-term care and benefits. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 511 87 61 59
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07	First reading	C10-0139/2026	Temporary support and payment of advances regarding the increased fertiliser prices due to the Middle East crisis Discussion transcript Temporary support and payment of advances regarding the increased fertiliser prices due to the Middle East crisis Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on temporary support and payment of advances regarding the increased fertiliser prices due to the Middle East crisis (see minutes, item 7.9). European Parliament record	Procedure Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07	First reading	C10-0139/2026	Vote details Amendment 1 · After recital 2 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · After recital 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment would add a recital after recital 2, but its official text is unavailable. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital after recital 2; its official wording is unavailable. Does it benefit Russia? Official amendment wording is unavailable, so Russia impact cannot be assessed. 187 448 21 62 Commission proposal Plain-language guide Commission proposal This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the Commission proposal approves Parliament’s non-binding position and sets central priorities regarding temporary support and payment of advances for increased fertiliser prices due to the Middle East crisis. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position and its central priorities on temporary support and advance payments for fertiliser prices affected by the Middle East crisis. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 576 62 15 65
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07	First reading	A10-0174/2026	International road passenger transport services by coach and bus in the border regions: cabotage operations between Austria and Switzerland Discussion transcript International road passenger transport services by coach and bus in the border regions: cabotage operations between Austria and Switzerland Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on international road passenger transport services by coach and bus in the border regions: cabotage operations between Austria and Switzerland (see minutes, item 7.10). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Opinion Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07	First reading	A10-0174/2026	Vote details Commission proposal and amendments Plain-language guide Commission proposal and amendments This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on international road passenger transport services by coach and bus, focusing on cross-border cabotage between Austria and Switzerland to ensure clear transport rules. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and set clear rules for international coach and bus passenger transport and cross-border cabotage between Austria and Switzerland. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 654 4 1 59
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0180/2026	Draft amending budget No 1/2026: entering the surplus of the financial year 2025 Discussion transcript Draft amending budget No 1/2026: entering the surplus of the financial year 2025 Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on draft amending budget no 1/2026: entering the surplus of the financial year 2025 (see minutes, item 7.11). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0180/2026	Vote details Paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on EU budget revenue calls for new own resources of at least 60 billion euros per year to fund EU policy ambitions and avoid higher national contributions. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament’s non-binding position calling for new own resources of at least 60 billion euros annually for the EU budget. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 379 244 27 68 Amendment 4 · After paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call to focus on collecting existing EU resources lost to fraud rather than introducing new own resources that burden citizens. What a Yes vote means Would add a focus on collecting existing EU resources lost to fraud instead of introducing new own resources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 196 443 8 71 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a reminder that revenue fraud reached 45.01 billion euros by late 2025 based on European Public Prosecutor Office investigations. What a Yes vote means Would add a reminder about European Public Prosecutor Office revenue fraud figures to Parliament draft position. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 207 442 4 65 Amendment 6 · After paragraph 7 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · After paragraph 7 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a statement that weak customs controls cause billions in lost EU revenue and that stronger controls would generate more funds without new own resources. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for systematic customs controls to prevent EU budget revenue losses and avoid new own resources. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 194 441 11 72 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on Draft Amending Budget No 1/2026, entering the 2025 financial surplus to fund EU priorities. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position supporting the entry of the 2025 financial surplus into the EU budget. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 492 101 60 65
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0179/2026	Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: Application EGF/2026/000 TA 2026 - Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission Discussion transcript Mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: Application EGF/2026/000 TA 2026 - Technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on mobilisation of the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund: Application EGF/2026/000 TA 2026 - technical assistance at the initiative of the Commission (see minutes, item 7.12). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0179/2026	Vote details Motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position to mobilise 200,000 euros from the European Globalisation Adjustment Fund for technical assistance. What a Yes vote means Would approve the mobilisation of 200,000 euros for technical assistance to support displaced workers. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 532 64 62 60
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0178/2026	Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund: assistance to Romania, Cyprus and Spain with regard to natural disasters in 2025 Discussion transcript Mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund: assistance to Romania, Cyprus and Spain with regard to natural disasters in 2025 Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on mobilisation of the European Union Solidarity Fund: assistance to Romania, Cyprus and Spain with regard to natural disasters in 2025 (see minutes, item 7.12). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0178/2026	Vote details Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the EU Solidarity Fund, prioritising financial aid for natural disasters in Romania, Cyprus and Spain. It releases specific budget support to help these countries recover from recent severe weather events. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position, prioritising EU Solidarity Fund aid for natural disasters in Romania, Cyprus and Spain. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 642 13 1 62
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0170/2026	Financial activities of the European Investment Bank Group – annual report 2025 Discussion transcript Financial activities of the European Investment Bank Group – annual report 2025 Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on the financial activities of the European Investment Bank Group – annual report 2025 (see minutes, item 7.13). Jorge BUXADÉ VILLALBA Madam President, Ms Nadia Calviño, former minister of Sánchez and now at the head of the European Investment Bank, announced on social media the allocation of 365 million EUR for roads and railways in Morocco. Therefore, we believe it is important to include the following amendment: Regrets the allocation by the European Investment Bank of 365 million EUR to reinforce the resilience and security of Morocco's road and rail networks, as announced by the Bank's President, Nadia Calviño, on 30 June 2026. Recalls that these financial resources should be allocated as a priority to improving transport infrastructure within the Union, especially in light of the serious railway accidents that have occurred in recent years, which have highlighted deficiencies in the maintenance and modernisation of transport infrastructure in several Member States. Considers that such funding does not comply with the Bank's primary mission, established in Article 309 of the Treaty on the Functioning, consisting in contributing to the balanced and steady development of the internal market in the interest of the Union. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0170/2026	Vote details Amendment 3/1 · Before paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 3/1 · Before paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph requiring the EIB to prioritise cohesion, public services, and Member States' energy sovereignty, and explicitly prohibiting the diversion of EIB funds to militarisation. What a Yes vote means Would add a new paragraph prioritising EIB funding for cohesion, public services, and energy sovereignty while prohibiting militarisation financing. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: reduced EU defence capability could benefit Russia. 215 346 98 59 Amendment 3/2 · Before paragraph 1 Plain-language guide Amendment 3/2 · Before paragraph 1 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph prioritising European Investment Bank funding for cohesion, public services and social projects while banning funding for militarisation. What a Yes vote means Would add a new paragraph stating that European Investment Bank funding must prioritise public investment, social cohesion and energy sovereignty, and must not finance militarisation. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: reduced EU defence capability could benefit Russia. 78 544 32 64 Amendment 11 · After paragraph 5 Plain-language guide Amendment 11 · After paragraph 5 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a rule stating the European Investment Bank must act only as a last-resort backup for market failures and not crowd out private capital or national spending. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement that the European Investment Bank must limit interventions strictly to market failures and avoid replacing private or national investment. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 116 502 38 62 Amendment 12 · After paragraph 6 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · After paragraph 6 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a warning that EIB instruments should not bypass normal budgetary rules for EU funding, requiring full parliamentary oversight. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement that EIB reinforcement must be subject to full parliamentary scrutiny and not bypass normal budgetary procedures. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 139 498 18 63 Amendment 4 · paragraph 8 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · paragraph 8 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on an amendment to the EIB annual report asks the Commission to propose extending the Recovery and Resilience Facility implementation deadline to August 2028. What a Yes vote means Would replace the EIB-focused RRF continuity call with a direct Commission proposal deadline for an RRF extension by August 2028. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 170 450 38 60 Amendment 6 · paragraph 12 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · paragraph 12 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EIB to apply technology-neutral evaluation criteria, including nuclear energy, when financing low-carbon projects. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for technology-neutral criteria, including nuclear energy, in EIB low-carbon energy project financing. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 396 242 15 65 Amendment 7 · After paragraph 13 Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · After paragraph 13 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a requirement for the EIB to disclose lessons from the Northvolt bankruptcy and strengthen due diligence for unproven technologies. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for the EIB to disclose bankruptcy lessons, enhance due diligence for unproven projects, and evaluate late payments. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 202 426 26 64 Amendment 8 · paragraph 15 Plain-language guide Amendment 8 · paragraph 15 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the European Investment Bank to review environmental, social and governance reporting requirements to ensure proportionality and prevent competitive disadvantages for European businesses. What a Yes vote means Would add a request for the European Investment Bank to review environmental, social and governance reporting rules. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 372 274 15 57 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 19 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 19 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a rule prohibiting EIB funds from supporting militarisation and requiring them to fund social needs. What a Yes vote means Would add a prohibition on using EIB resources for militarisation and mandate funding for social needs. Does it benefit Russia? Potentially: reduced EU defence capability could benefit Russia. 82 542 33 61 Amendment 9 · paragraph 21 Plain-language guide Amendment 9 · paragraph 21 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EIB to remove remaining defence funding restrictions and administrative barriers for security and border investments. What a Yes vote means Would add a formal request urging the EIB to lift all remaining financing restrictions on defence and security projects. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 248 398 12 60 Amendment 13 · After paragraph 21 Plain-language guide Amendment 13 · After paragraph 21 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph requiring European Investment Bank defence financing to respect national sovereignty and strengthen European industrial bases. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision prioritising national sovereignty and European industrial sovereignty in European Investment Bank defence financing. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 139 462 48 69 Amendment 1 · After paragraph 25 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · After paragraph 25 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for Member States to expand the European Investment Bank exclusion list to finance weapons and ammunition to develop the European defence industry. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for Member States to expand the European Investment Bank exclusion list to finance weapons and ammunition. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 341 252 54 71 Amendment 10 · After paragraph 25 Plain-language guide Amendment 10 · After paragraph 25 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a requirement for the European Investment Bank to make external loans conditional on partner countries cooperating on migrant returns and readmission. What a Yes vote means Would add migration cooperation as a mandatory lending criterion for non-EU countries within the European Investment Bank external framework. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 357 265 15 81 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the European Investment Bank's 2025 annual financial activities. It prioritizes sustainable investments, SME financing, and transparency across EU development projects. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position prioritizing sustainable investments, SME financing, and transparency for the EIB Group. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 316 281 39 82
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0189/2026	Recommendation on the changing geopolitical situation in East Asia and the need for closer cooperation with like-minded partners in the region Discussion transcript Recommendation on the changing geopolitical situation in East Asia and the need for closer cooperation with like-minded partners in the region Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on the recommendation on the changing geopolitical situation in East Asia and the need for closer cooperation with like-minded partners in the region (see minutes, item 7.14). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Opinion Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0189/2026	Vote details Amendment 1 · paragraph 1, before point a Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · paragraph 1, before point a This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EU and East Asian partners to pursue peaceful relations based on the UN Charter and avoid confrontation or disinformation campaigns involving China. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision urging the EU and East Asian partners to promote peace under the UN Charter and avoid confrontational policies or disinformation against states like China. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 67 546 22 83 Amendment 6 · paragraph 1, after point d Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · paragraph 1, after point d This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call to reverse weakenings to the corporate sustainability due diligence directive and enforce full value-chain rules for South-East Asian supply chains. What a Yes vote means Would add binding supply-chain due diligence rules and sanctions for companies placing products on the EU market. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 210 415 22 71 Amendment 7 · paragraph 1, after point d Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · paragraph 1, after point d This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a requirement to conduct a new HRIA for EU-Philippines FTA talks and secure progress on labor and union rights in all trade deals. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for a new HRIA on the EU-Philippines FTA and enforceable labor and trade union rights in all EU trade agreements. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 141 496 16 65 Amendment 2 · paragraph 1, after point h Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · paragraph 1, after point h This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EU and partners to base relations with China on mutual respect, the One China principle, sovereignty, and non-interference. What a Yes vote means Would add a point requiring EU-China relations to follow the One China principle, mutual respect, and non-interference in internal affairs. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 69 534 32 83 Amendment 3 · After recital Y Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · After recital Y This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new recital highlighting the growing EU trade deficit with Viet Nam under the EVFTA and persistent labor rights violations. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital noting Viet Nam's rising trade deficit with the EU and unfulfilled labor rights obligations under the trade agreement. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 136 485 32 65 Amendment 4 · After recital Y Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After recital Y This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add that EU-Philippines free trade talks resumed without a new human rights impact assessment. What a Yes vote means Would add a reference to the lack of a human rights impact assessment in EU-Philippines trade negotiations. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 135 499 19 65 Amendment 5 · After recital Y Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After recital Y This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a recital noting human rights concerns and political persecution in the Philippines regarding resumed EU FTA talks. What a Yes vote means Would add a recital highlighting ongoing human rights concerns and political persecution regarding resumed EU-Philippines FTA talks. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 121 486 47 64 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on deepening security and economic cooperation with like-minded partners in East Asia. It sets priorities on regional stability, trade resilience, and multilateral partnerships. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and key priorities on security and economic cooperation in East Asia. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 542 37 79 60
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0171/2026	Competition policy – annual report 2025 Discussion transcript Competition policy – annual report 2025 Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on competition policy – annual report 2025 (see minutes, item 7.15). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0171/2026	Vote details Amendment 1 · After paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · After paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for the EU and Member States to pursue an active industrial strategy and allow public investments despite competition rules. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision stating competition rules must not hinder public investments and industrial strategy. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 76 402 175 65 Amendment 2 · After paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · After paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for an EU framework to facilitate public ownership and public control of companies in strategic sectors for the climate transition. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the Commission and Member States to create an EU framework facilitating public ownership and control in strategic sectors. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 48 541 63 66 Amendment 10 · After paragraph 9 Plain-language guide Amendment 10 · After paragraph 9 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on the annual competition report invites member states to shift from subsidies to public procurement reserved for European companies to rival US and Chinese giants. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for member states to replace subsidies with reserved public procurement for European companies to compete with US and Chinese firms. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 118 492 40 68 Amendment 3 · After paragraph 13 Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · After paragraph 13 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for permanent windfall taxes, price controls, and antitrust rules to counter corporate-driven inflation and support households. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for permanent windfall profit taxes across all sectors and direct redistribution of profits to low-income households. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 118 510 25 65 Amendment 4 · After paragraph 41 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · After paragraph 41 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a warning that food and energy firms made abnormal profits during inflation, urging strict competition enforcement to protect consumers from windfall gains. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the Commission and national authorities to monitor market power and prevent excessive profit extraction in essential food and energy sectors. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 110 435 109 64 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 45 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 45 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new point stating that EU telecom market consolidation leads to lower investment, higher prices, and poorer consumer services. What a Yes vote means Would add a statement that telecom market consolidation reduces investment and increases prices for consumers. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 136 463 56 63 Amendment 6 · After paragraph 46 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · After paragraph 46 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a requirement for the Commission to evaluate worker harm and employer concentration during merger reviews. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for the Commission to evaluate worker harm and employer concentration during merger reviews. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 139 369 144 66 Amendment 7 · After paragraph 50 Plain-language guide Amendment 7 · After paragraph 50 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote adds a provision stating state aid must not transfer public wealth to private companies and requires strict social and environmental conditions. What a Yes vote means Would add a requirement for strict social and environmental conditions on companies receiving state aid to prevent public wealth transfers. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 108 468 77 65 Amendment 12 · After paragraph 50 Plain-language guide Amendment 12 · After paragraph 50 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a paragraph stating that green aid frameworks raise energy costs, burden consumers, and expand EU bureaucracy. What a Yes vote means Would add a statement that green subsidy policies increase energy costs, shift burdens onto consumers, and expand EU bureaucracy. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 169 456 29 64 Paragraph 54 Plain-language guide Paragraph 54 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote calls for greater flexibility and fewer restrictions on State aid for islands and vulnerable regions to reduce economic disparities. What a Yes vote means Would urge greater flexibility and fewer restrictions on State aid to help islands and vulnerable regions. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 600 27 29 62 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on the 2025 competition policy annual report. It sets priorities on enforcement, market fairness, and industrial competitiveness. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and set its central priorities on competition policy and enforcement. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 501 61 95 61
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0169/2026	A coherent tax framework for the EU's financial sector Discussion transcript A coherent tax framework for the EU's financial sector Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on a coherent tax framework for the EU's financial sector (see minutes, item 7.16). Matthias ECKE Madam President, colleagues, we cannot carry on like this. This is not sustainable. Our financial sector taxation system needs reform. Europe needs more investment for our digital and green transitions to strengthen our security and to foster investment. We need a deeper integrated financial market, but our taxation system has not kept up with that challenge. The VAT exemption on financial services dates back to 1977. This is nearly 50 years and it was designed for an entirely different financial system. Today, it creates distortions and it undermines our single market. There is no simple solution for that. This is why this report is proposing no specific recipe, but it calls on the Commission to thoroughly investigate the matter and to propose a coherent framework. And to be honest, colleagues, I expect ambition. I expect the Commission to also assess the role that financial transaction tax and windfall taxes can play in such a framework. We should also take a hard look on whether national tax regimes for the financial sector contribute to harmful tax competition in the European Union and sustain tax havens. Colleagues, the shortcomings of the current system have led to more than 90 different national sectoral taxations – more than 90 – across the Union. So, this patchwork creates unnecessary complexity and bureaucracy. It distorts the single market and it ultimately weakens European competitiveness. After almost 50 years, it's time for a change. It's time to modernise. I want you to be part of that modernisation. I am asking for your support. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0169/2026	Vote details Amendment 3 · paragraph 27 Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · paragraph 27 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the call for a new VAT impact review with findings from the June 2026 Commission study on hidden VAT and tax distortions in financial services. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament's review request with detailed findings from the June 2026 Commission study on financial sector VAT exemptions and hidden tax burdens. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 283 341 34 60 Amendment 4 · paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace Parliament's note of the Commission's FTT proposal withdrawal with a call for a concrete plan addressing the policy gap and requiring equal ambition for taxing the financial sector. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament's note of the withdrawal with a demand for a concrete replacement plan and matching ambition for financial sector taxation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 214 389 54 61 Amendment 5 · paragraph 34 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · paragraph 34 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a call for the European Commission to propose a temporary EU tax on exceptional bank profits. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for the European Commission to propose temporary EU taxes on exceptional financial sector profits during crises. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 210 393 45 70 Amendment 6 · paragraph 35 Plain-language guide Amendment 6 · paragraph 35 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment adds a statement to the Parliament’s report on a coherent EU financial sector tax framework expressing concern that tax-driven profit shifting undermines member state revenues, tax sovereignty, and the Savings and Investment Union. What a Yes vote means Would add a statement noting that tax-driven profit shifting undermines member state revenues, tax sovereignty, and the Savings and Investment Union. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 279 333 41 65 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position urging a coherent tax framework for the EU financial sector. It prioritises fair taxation and market stability across member states. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and central priorities for an EU financial sector tax framework. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 418 152 85 63
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0173/2026	A new strategy for media literacy and digital learning Discussion transcript A new strategy for media literacy and digital learning Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on a new strategy for media literacy and digital learning (see minutes, item 7.17). Marcos ROS SEMPERE Madam President, for a long time we viewed the expansion of the internet and social networks with optimism. We thought that information would circulate freely and that public conversation would be more open. However, the digital space that completely permeates us has changed radically, and that optimism has become clouded. The concentration of power in few hands, opacity, and a business model based on permanent addiction have profoundly transformed that ecosystem. Disinformation circulates easily, manipulated content multiplies, and artificial intelligence has accelerated and multiplied this effect. Understanding how this new world works must be a democratic priority today. Decades ago, we understood that full citizenship did not exist without knowing how to read and write. Today, something similar happens to us: in the digital era, no one can fully exercise their rights if they do not distinguish reality from disinformation, if they do not recognize manipulation generated by artificial intelligence, or if they do not understand how algorithms work. And if our citizenry does not have those tools, our democracies are not prepared for this new digital era. Ladies and gentlemen, no member state can face this challenge alone. That is why today we are voting to implement a new media literacy and digital learning strategy for all of Europe. A strategy that recognizes these competencies as basic and essential for all citizens, at any age and throughout their lives, especially for boys, girls, and adolescents. It will serve for their protection against harassment, inappropriate content, and addictive design, as well as for our elderly and society as a whole, because no one can be free in a digital environment they do not understand. Media and digital literacy is a democratic necessity, and today we are sending a clear message. Thank you for your vote. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0173/2026	Vote details Amendment 1 · paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Amendment 1 · paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This amendment replaces Parliament's draft media literacy strategy to exclude the EU Democracy Shield from safeguarding democratic processes and restrict institutional rules on information. What a Yes vote means Would replace the draft position to exclude media literacy from the EU Democracy Shield and restrict institutional determinations of legitimate information. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 192 454 6 66 Paragraph 3 Plain-language guide Paragraph 3 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Stresses that media literacy and digital learning should be reflected within broader EU initiatives aimed at safeguarding democratic processes, including the EU Democracy Shield. What a Yes vote means Would add that media literacy and digital learning should be reflected within broader EU initiatives aimed at safeguarding democratic processes, including the EU Democracy Shield. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 448 188 16 66 Amendment 2 · paragraph 6 Plain-language guide Amendment 2 · paragraph 6 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace Parliament's draft on media literacy by stating that digital learning is primarily the duty of parents and national schools, not EU institutions. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament's draft with language limiting EU oversight in education and affirming national competence. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 184 464 4 66 Amendment 3 · After paragraph 6 Plain-language guide Amendment 3 · After paragraph 6 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph requiring EU institutions to respect transparency and national democratic self-determination when handling funds and member state policies. What a Yes vote means Would add a new paragraph stating EU institutions must ensure transparency, equal treatment, and respect for member states' democratic self-determination. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 164 461 29 64 Paragraph 9 Plain-language guide Paragraph 9 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote urges using all regulatory instruments and stakeholder cooperation for an EU media literacy and digital learning approach. What a Yes vote means Would urge using all regulatory instruments and stakeholder cooperation for an EU media literacy and digital learning approach. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 461 121 74 62 Amendment 4 · paragraph 10 Plain-language guide Amendment 4 · paragraph 10 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would replace the draft text on media literacy cooperation to require financial transparency, suspend funding for conflicts of interest, and keep education control with Member States. What a Yes vote means Would replace Parliament's draft position to mandate strict financial transparency, suspend funding where conflicts exist, and ensure national control over media education. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 191 455 4 68 Paragraph 14 Plain-language guide Paragraph 14 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on a media literacy report urges the Commission and states to establish a structured monitoring framework with measurable indicators to assess critical thinking and resilience to disinformation. What a Yes vote means Would urge the Commission and states to establish a monitoring framework with measurable indicators to assess critical thinking and disinformation resilience. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 455 151 41 71 Paragraph 16, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 16, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote asks the Commission to propose a common EU approach to age-appropriate access for minors on online platforms while respecting fundamental rights. What a Yes vote means Would urge the Commission to propose a common EU approach to age-appropriate access for minors on online platforms. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 465 143 35 75 Paragraph 27, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 27, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote on media literacy urges the Commission to fund traditional media and ensure fair pay for journalism through the AgoraEU programme. What a Yes vote means Would urge the Commission to fund traditional media and journalism through programmes like AgoraEU. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 497 138 17 66 Amendment 5 · After paragraph 33 Plain-language guide Amendment 5 · After paragraph 33 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a new paragraph stating that education remains a national competence under EU law and opposing EU attempts to impose educational content. What a Yes vote means Would add a provision asserting national competence over education and opposing EU imposition of educational content. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 189 456 11 62 Paragraph 35 Plain-language guide Paragraph 35 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote updates Parliament's position on a media literacy strategy by asking the Commission and Member States to create an EU educational guide and workshops for all age groups on critical thinking, verification, fact-checking, and AI tools. What a Yes vote means Would add an EU media literacy guide and workshops for all ages on critical thinking, source verification, fact-checking, and AI tools. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 473 174 7 64 Paragraph 43, part 2 Plain-language guide Paragraph 43, part 2 This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description Would add a call for EU countries to boost funding and partnerships for public libraries and community hubs to improve digital learning and media literacy. What a Yes vote means Would add a call for national authorities to increase investment, staffing, and digital resources for local libraries and civil society organisations. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 464 177 3 74 Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This whole-motion vote approves Parliament's non-binding position on a new media literacy and digital learning strategy. It prioritises critical thinking, countering disinformation, and safe digital education for all citizens. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position on media literacy and digital learning, prioritising critical thinking and countering disinformation. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 447 128 78 65
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0187/2026	Implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2026 High-Level Political Forum Discussion transcript Implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2026 High-Level Political Forum Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on the implementation and delivery of the Sustainable Development Goals in view of the 2026 High-Level Political Forum (see minutes, item 7.18). Lukas MANDL Madam President, colleagues, the United Nations are more needed now than in decades before. The world needs the United Nations. At the same time, the United Nations need a reform. There is an urgent need for a reform. I thank the co-negotiators here in the European Parliament, especially Pierfrancesco Maran, for tough negotiations, but constructive negotiations to receive a good result for next week's high-level political forum at the UN headquarters in New York to represent the European stance for a rule-based international order. And I also want to say to some who criticised the Sustainable Development Goals: we have to see them holistically. We have to see them balanced and we have to follow them in a balanced approach. Also, economic growth is part of the Sustainable Development Goals. Also education. Also innovation that drives the economy is part of the SDGs. So if we follow the SDGs in an unideological way and follow them in a balanced way in our operative work, we contribute to a positive outcome. Pierfrancesco MARAN Madam President, dear colleagues, sustainability, competitiveness and social justice must go hand in hand. More than a decade ago, the world came together to adopt the 2030 agenda. Since then, millions have escaped poverty and gained access to education, clean water and electricity. Yet today, progress is slowing as conflict and climate change put those achievements at risk. Next week, at the United Nations High‑Level Political Forum, Parliament will contribute to accelerating the implementation of the Sustainable Development Goals. Leadership means responsibility. Europe must lead by example by advancing climate neutrality, affordable clean energy and stronger international partnership. European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Amendments Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0187/2026	Vote details Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position urging faster progress on the UN Sustainable Development Goals by 2026. It calls for stronger EU action on poverty eradication, climate resilience, and sustainable economic growth. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and prioritize poverty eradication, climate resilience, and sustainable economic growth. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 374 185 74 85
Date	Classification	Reference	Motion	Documents
2026-07-07		A10-0186/2026	Digital assets – challenges for the competitiveness and integrity of the European Union’s financial system Discussion transcript Digital assets – challenges for the competitiveness and integrity of the European Union’s financial system Where available, remarks are AI-translated into English. Select the language badge to view the original. Roberta METSOLA (Chair) The next vote is on digital assets – challenges for the competitiveness and integrity of the European Union's financial system (see minutes, item 7.19). European Parliament record	Procedure Draft report Amendments Plenary report · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading Adopted text · 1st reading · Summary
2026-07-07		A10-0186/2026	Vote details Final vote on the motion for a resolution Plain-language guide Final vote on the motion for a resolution This plain-language guide and its assessment were generated by AI from official European Parliament records. Description This vote approves Parliament's non-binding position addressing challenges in the EU financial system. It prioritizes competitiveness, integrity, and regulatory clarity for digital assets. What a Yes vote means Would approve Parliament's non-binding position and prioritize competitiveness, integrity, and regulatory clarity for digital assets. Does it benefit Russia? No supported Russia-related effect is stated. 390 86 134 108