Objection pursuant to Rule 114(3): Certification methodologies for carbon farming activities
Rejected 199 for · 407 against · 45 abstentions · 68 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 | 4 | 0 | 167 | 14 | 98% |
| S&D | 92 | 7 | 24 | 12 | 75% |
| PfE | 0 | 28 | 51 | 5 | 65% |
| ECR | 4 | 0 | 70 | 10 | 95% |
| Renew | 13 | 0 | 59 | 6 | 82% |
| Greens/EFA | 47 | 1 | 0 | 5 | 98% |
| The Left | 37 | 1 | 0 | 7 | 97% |
| ESN | 0 | 1 | 20 | 6 | 95% |
| NI | 2 | 7 | 16 | 3 | 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 Against. Each group's position is the option chosen by most of its members who voted.
This vote needed a majority of all members (objection to a delegated act).
By country
About this vote
Reference: B10-0471/2026
Procedure: 2026/2819(DEA)
Committee: ENVI
20 October 2026, 12:30 · 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.