Cooperation among enforcement authorities regarding unfair trading practices in the agri-food supply chain
Adopted 555 for · 0 against · 26 abstentions · 138 did not vote
Details
The whole chamber
Seating as in the European Parliament chamber, in this order: The Left, S&D, Greens/EFA, Renew, EPP, ECR, PfE, ESN and the non-attached members.
How each group voted
| Group | For | Abst. | Against | Did not vote | Cohesion |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EPP | 143 | 1 | 0 | 43 | 99% |
| S&D | 110 | 0 | 0 | 25 | 100% |
| PfE | 68 | 2 | 0 | 14 | 97% |
| ECR | 60 | 3 | 0 | 16 | 95% |
| Renew | 63 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 100% |
| Greens/EFA | 42 | 0 | 0 | 11 | 100% |
| The Left | 39 | 0 | 0 | 7 | 100% |
| ESN | 8 | 17 | 0 | 2 | 68% |
| NI | 22 | 3 | 0 | 7 | n/a |
Source: European Parliament roll-call votes, via HowTheyVote (ODbL). Collected 8 November 2026.
How each country voted
Click a country to see its MEPsSource: European Parliament roll-call votes, via HowTheyVote (ODbL). Collected 8 November 2026.
Winning majority
The winning side was For. Each group's position is the option chosen by most of its members who voted.
By country
About this vote
Reference: A10-0153/2025
Procedure: 2024/0318(COD)
Committee: AGRI
12 February 2026, 12:19 · Strasbourg plenary
Explanations of vote
MEPs who explained their vote orally in plenary, in the order they spoke.
- Cristian TerheşECR · RomaniaText and video →
Verbatim report of the European Parliament. © European Union, 2026 - Source: European Parliament.
Method
Cohesion is the share of the group's voting members who followed the group position, the option chosen by most of them. Off the group line: an MEP who voted differently from their group's position. Prepared with AI tools and reviewed by a person before publishing. Report an error: radar@parleon.eu.