Vote in the European Parliament
Discharge 2024: General budget of the EU - European External Action Service
Overall Result
Adopted- 429 For
- 145 Against
- 76 Abstention
- 69 Did not vote
How we count
- Yes, No and Abstention come from the European Parliament's roll-call voting protocol.
- “Did not vote” is derived: MEPs with a mandate on the voting day for whom no vote was recorded. Abstentions do not count towards this.
- Subsequent vote corrections are shown but do not change the official result.
- Each vote (overall vote, amendment, partial vote) counts separately. Therefore totals may differ from pages that count differently.
Status and procedure
Outcome as recorded by the European Parliament.
- Vote held on
- Latest recorded step
- Official Journal · (64 days ago)
- Next scheduled step
- No further step is scheduled in the source.
- Publication in the Official Journal recorded
Procedure timeline
2025/2150(DEC) · DEC
Recorded procedure activities. These do not establish whether a law has entered into force.
- Recorded: Referral
- Recorded: Committee stage
- Recorded: Plenary
- Recorded: Other activity
- Latest recorded: Official Journal
Recorded activities (11)
- Referral to committee
- Committee report tabled
- Committee opinion adopted
- Committee amendments tabled
- Committee report adopted
- Tabling for plenary
- Plenary debate
- Other recorded activity
- Plenary vote
- Plenary vote results
- Publication in the Official Journal
Scheduled activities (not confirmation of completion)
- Plenary debate
- Plenary vote
Procedure file (OEIL) · European Parliament data
Retrieved:
Sources
Data: EP Open Data API
What is this about?
- Discharge granted for EAD 2024 budget by Parliament.
- Criticism of underfunding despite increased tasks.
- Focus on Ukraine support and hybrid threats.
Amendment history (4)
Wording as published by the EP, in English.
Paragraph 33
Tabled by Ondřej Knotek · PfE
… anti-corruption fight and to strengthen democracy and human rights in various countries; Added: stresses, however, that cooperation by third countries on migration, including on preventing irregular migration, effective border management, and the readmission of their own nationals, must be a core objective of the Union’s external action; underlines that this cooperation should be an important element in the development and implementation of partnerships, political dialogue and the allocation of EU funding and incentives; welcomes the fact that the EEAS and Union delegations continue to engage …
Paragraph 26 c (new)
Tabled by Dick Erixon, Charlie Weimers, Cristian Terheş · ECR
Added: 26 c. Welcomes the Czech ammunition initiative as a concrete example of effective, swift and practical European support for Ukraine's defence; stresses that such Member State-led initiatives demonstrate that targeted, results-oriented cooperation can deliver critical military materiel faster and more efficiently than centralised Union procurement mechanisms;
Paragraph 27 a (new)
Tabled by Dick Erixon, Charlie Weimers, Sebastian Tynkkynen +1 · ECR
Added: 27 a. Stresses that Union development and cooperation funding from the EU budget must be conditional on effective cooperation by partner countries on migration management, including the conclusion and implementation of readmission agreements; considers that Union external action funding should serve as leverage for the Union's strategic interests, including the return and readmission of illegally staying third-country nationals;
Paragraph 27 b (new)
Tabled by Dick Erixon, Sebastian Tynkkynen, Cristian Terheş · ECR
Added: 27 b. Stresses that the Union external action funding must be matched by a rigorous, results-oriented evaluation framework; calls on the EEAS, in cooperation with the Commission, the Court of Auditors, EPPO and OLAF, to commission systematic, independent ex-post impact evaluations of every external action programme, comparing intended objectives with measurable outcomes and reporting publicly on cost-effectiveness; insists that any future increase in external action funding be conditional on the demonstration that existing programmes deliver verifiable impact for taxpayers and for partner-country populations, in line with the principle that every euro spent from the Union budget represents a contribution from taxpayers in the Member States and must be treated accordingly;
Vote by political group
How the political groups voted
- 65For
- 0Against
- 0Abstention
- 12Did not vote
- 154For
- 1Against
- 4Abstention
- 26Did not vote
- 124For
- 1Against
- 0Abstention
- 10Did not vote
- 45For
- 0Against
- 0Abstention
- 8Did not vote
- 37For
- 4Against
- 3Abstention
- 2Did not vote
- 3For
- 22Against
- 2Abstention
- 3Did not vote
- 1For
- 12Against
- 67Abstention
- 1Did not vote
- 0For
- 78Against
- 0Abstention
- 7Did not vote
- 0For
- 27Against
- 0Abstention
- 0Did not vote
Members
Showing 10 of 719
| Name | Country | Group | Vote Position |
|---|---|---|---|
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For |