Vote in the European Parliament
Banking Union – annual report 2023
Overall Result
Adopted- 372 For
- 115 Against
- 132 Abstention
- 86 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
- Plenary · (1067 days ago)
- Next scheduled step
- No further step is scheduled in the source.
Procedure timeline
2023/2078(INI) · INI
Recorded procedure activities. These do not establish whether a law has entered into force.
- Recorded: Referral
- Recorded: Committee stage
- Latest recorded: Plenary
Recorded activities (6)
- Referral to committee
- Committee report tabled
- Committee report adopted
- Tabling for plenary
- Plenary vote
- Plenary vote results
Scheduled activities (not confirmation of completion)
- Plenary vote
Procedure file (OEIL) · European Parliament data
Retrieved:
Sources
Data: EP Open Data API
What is this about?
- Banking Union completion requires EDIS establishment.
- ECB and SRB enhance banking sector crisis resilience.
- Banks must consistently enforce sanctions against Russia.
Amendment history (4)
Wording as published by the EP, in English.
- Amendment 1Rejected
Recital H
Tabled by Philippe Lamberts · Verts/ALE
H.
Removed: whereas the lack of cross-border consolidation of the EU banking sector is affecting its global competitiveness and consumer banking in some Member States is still dominated by a small number of banks;whereas the profitability gap between EU and US banks has widened during … return on equity is 5 points lower than that of US banks’4; Added: whereas institutions deemed ‘too big to fail’ continue to pose systemic risks to the European financial system because of their size, complexity and interconnectedness; 4 De Vito, L. et al., Understanding the profitability gap between euro … - Amendment 2Rejected
Paragraph 9
Tabled by Philippe Lamberts · Verts/ALE
9.
Removed: Calls on the Commission to assess impediments to cross-border mergers as well as potential incentives for ring fencing; takes note that, according to a public statement by Andrea Enria, Chair of the ECB Supervisory Board, the banking sector is still, by and large, a collection of national banking sectors; notes that a more integrated EU banking sector could enhance banks’ ability to undertake strategic investments and foster the development of EU capital markets, while acknowledging that the diversity of banking business models in the euro area enhances the resilience of the financial system; notesAdded: Notes the risks that ‘too big to fail’ institutionsRemoved: could entail, and notes that financial stability could be increased by aAdded: entail, and calls for a structural reform of EU G-SIBs that addresses moral hazard risksRemoved: highlights that cross-border consolidation without excessive concentration could increase the profitability of the EU banking sector, and potentially improve the current situation of reduced services offered and increased costs for citizens in many Member States;Added: and contributes to financial stability; - Amendment 3Rejected
Paragraph 12 a (new)
Tabled by Philippe Lamberts · Verts/ALE
Added: 12a. Recalls that fossil fuel asset values are set to collapse; recalls that the collapse of fossil fuel asset values could trigger a major financial crisis; calls for higher capital charges to be set for fossil fuel investments, including by applying a risk weight of 1 250 % to new fossil fuel exposures and ensuring that such investments are fully equity funded;
- Amendment 4Rejected
Paragraph 25
Tabled by Philippe Lamberts · Verts/ALE
25.
Removed: WelcomesAdded: Notes the agreement reached at interinstitutional level to implement Basel III standards in the EU;Removed: underlines that the framework will deliver different levels of increase in prudential requirements depending on banks’ reliance on the use of internal models to calculate their risk-weights; highlights that the new rules have strengthened and better specified proportionality in banking supervision and will continue to increase financial stability in the EU; underlines the importance of a level playing field between jurisdictions;Added: calls for the co-legislators to reconsider the deviations from international prudential standards which they have introduced, given that new risks have emerged since the adoption of the Basel III framework; recalls that the specificities of EU banks were taken into account in the calibration of Basel capital requirements;
Vote by political group
How the political groups voted
- 94For
- 0Against
- 3Abstention
- 4Did not vote
- 117For
- 0Against
- 1Abstention
- 23Did not vote
- 142For
- 4Against
- 9Abstention
- 23Did not vote
- 19For
- 68Against
- 74Abstention
- 24Did not vote
- 0For
- 23Against
- 0Abstention
- 1Did not vote
- 0For
- 10Against
- 14Abstention
- 6Did not vote
- 0For
- 9Against
- 3Abstention
- 1Did not vote
- 0For
- 1Against
- 28Abstention
- 4Did not vote
Members
Showing 10 of 705
| Name | Country | Group | Vote Position |
|---|---|---|---|
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For | |||
For |