The recent hybrid attacks and instrumentalisation of migrants in Ceuta and the need for a coordinated response to protect EU's external borders
Adopted 339 for · 225 against · 16 abstentions · 137 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 | 142 | 4 | 0 | 38 | 97% |
| S&D | 0 | 2 | 108 | 25 | 98% |
| PfE | 66 | 0 | 0 | 18 | 100% |
| ECR | 69 | 0 | 0 | 15 | 100% |
| Renew | 27 | 5 | 31 | 15 | 49% |
| Greens/EFA | 1 | 1 | 43 | 8 | 96% |
| The Left | 0 | 0 | 35 | 9 | 100% |
| ESN | 22 | 3 | 0 | 2 | 88% |
| NI | 12 | 1 | 8 | 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.
Decisive: EPP. Without the votes of this group on the winning side, the result would have flipped.
By country
About this vote
Reference: B10-0406/2026
Procedure: 2026/2870(RSP)
Committee:
17 September 2026, 12:59 · Strasbourg plenary
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.