Humanitarian situation in Gaza, the need to reach a ceasefire and the risks of regional escalation
Importance Score
Medium importanceWhy this vote stands out:
- ✓Some political group division
- ✓Some national delegation divergence
- ✓Close result
- ✓Many MEPs voted against their group
Show full breakdown
Methodology: importance-v0.1 · The Importance Score is a prioritisation indicator. It does not judge whether a vote is good or bad.
What was this vote about?
This vote concerned “Humanitarian situation in Gaza, the need to reach a ceasefire and the risks of regional escalation”. EPP, PfE, ECR and ESN voted mostly in favour, while S&D, Renew, Greens-EFA, NI and Left voted mostly against. The motion was rejected by a narrow margin (229 for, 250 against, 28 abstentions).
Automated summary generated from official vote metadata and observed voting patterns. Not a legal interpretation.
Why it matters
This is a substantive vote (such as an amendment or resolution) that contributes to shaping the final position of the Parliament on a dossier. It reflects the political direction taken on specific provisions. The outcome was close, which makes individual choices and absences especially consequential.
Result analysis
Close vote analysis
The margin was 21 votes. 198 MEPs did not vote.
Groups whose absences exceeded the margin
- EPPhad 59 absent MEPs (margin was 21)
- S&Dhad 43 absent MEPs (margin was 21)
- Renewhad 22 absent MEPs (margin was 21)
Countries whose absences exceeded the margin
Absences larger than the margin are numerically significant but do NOT imply the outcome would have changed. That would require modelling how each absent member would have voted, which this analysis does not do.
By political group
Country angle
- Poland36
- Germany32
- Italy24
- Czech Republic11
- Hungary9
- France36
- Spain33
- Portugal15
- Ireland13
- Netherlands12
- Belgium
- Bulgaria
- Croatia
- Czech Republic
- Estonia
- France
- Germany
- Italy
Full breakdown by all countries
Individual MEP positions
Loading individual positions…