EU political strategy on Latin America
Importance Score
Medium importanceWhy this vote stands out:
- ✓Some political group division
- ✓Significant national delegation divergence
- ✓Very close result
- ✓High participation
- ✓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 “EU political strategy on Latin America”. EPP, S&D and Renew voted mostly in favour, while PfE, Greens-EFA, Left, NI and ESN voted mostly against. ECR mostly abstained. The motion was rejected by a narrow margin (259 for, 269 against, 97 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 10 votes. 95 MEPs did not vote.
Groups whose absences exceeded the margin
- EPPhad 26 absent MEPs (margin was 10)
- S&Dhad 23 absent MEPs (margin was 10)
- Lefthad 12 absent MEPs (margin was 10)
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
- Germany48
- Spain41
- Romania16
- Sweden16
- Denmark11
- France66
- Poland41
- Belgium12
- Hungary12
- Austria9
- Austria
- Croatia
- Cyprus
- Finland
- Germany
- Greece
- Italy
- Netherlands
Full breakdown by all countries
Individual MEP positions
Loading individual positions…