BETA


2015/2259(INI) Implementation of the Food Contact Materials Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004

Progress: Procedure completed

RoleCommitteeRapporteurShadows
Lead ENVI SCHALDEMOSE Christel (icon: S&D S&D) COLLIN-LANGEN Birgit (icon: PPE PPE), NICHOLSON James (icon: ECR ECR), JÄÄTTEENMÄKI Anneli (icon: ALDE ALDE), HÄUSLING Martin (icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE), PEDICINI Piernicola (icon: EFDD EFDD), D'ORNANO Mireille (icon: ENF ENF)
Lead committee dossier:
Legal Basis:
RoP 54

Events

2017/03/29
   EC - Commission response to text adopted in plenary
Documents
2016/10/06
   EP - Results of vote in Parliament
2016/10/06
   EP - Decision by Parliament
Details

The European Parliament adopted by 559 votes to 31, with 26 abstentions a resolution on the implementation of the Food Contact Materials (FCMs) Regulation ((EC) No 1935/2004.

Members acknowledged that the Framework Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 constitutes a solid legal basis, the objectives of which remain relevant. They considered that the adoption of specific measures to overcome shortcomings that exist in the implementation and enforcement of the legislation in place are needed.

Successes and gaps of the implementation of EU legislation : Members underlined that, while the major focus should be on the adoption of specific measures for those 13 materials not yet regulated at EU level, all relevant stakeholders point out that shortcomings exist in the implementation and enforcement of the legislation in place.

Taking account of the risks they pose to human health, the Commission should prioritise the drawing-up of specific EU measures for paper and board, varnishes and coatings, metals and alloys, printing inks and adhesives .

Given the risk of migration of mineral oils into food from food contact materials and articles made of paper and board, Parliament supported, pending the adoption of specific measures and a possible ban on mineral oils in inks, further research aimed at preventing such migration.

Members are of the opinion that the adoption of further specific measures at EU level would encourage business operators to develop safe reusable and recycled FCMs, thereby contributing to the EU’s efforts to establish a more effective circular economy.

The Commission is urged, when drawing up the measures required, to take account of the European Implementation Assessment conducted by the European Parliamentary Research Service (EPRS) and of the national measures which are already in force or are being prepared.

Risk assessment : aware of the important role played by EFSA (European Food and Safety Authority) in the risk assessment, Parliament called on the Commission to increase the level of funding for EFSA . It called on EFSA and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to cooperate and coordinate their work more closely.

The resolution stressed the need to:

continue with further scientific research into non-intentionally added substances (‘NIAS’) as, in contrast to known hazardous substances, their identity and structure, especially in plastics, are often unknown; extend the concept of vulnerable groups to pregnant and breastfeeding women and to include the potential effects of low-dose exposure and non-monotonic dose responses in the risk assessment criteria.

Members regretted that EFSA, in its current risk assessment procedure, does not take account of the so-called ‘ cocktail effect ’ or the effect of multiple concurrent and cumulative exposures from FCMs and other sources, which can cause adverse effects even if levels of the individual substances in the mixture are low. They exhorted the EFSA to do so in future.

The Commission is called upon to ensure:

ensure coherence between the regulations on FCMs and biocidal products and to clarify the roles of ECHA and EFSA in this respect; better coordination and a more coherent approach between the REACH and FCM legislation , in particular as regards substances classified as CMRs (categories 1A, 1B and 2) or SVHCs (extremely concerning) under REACH; ensure that harmful substances phased out under REACH are also phased out in FCMs.

Parliament also called on the Commission to consider identifying Bisphenol A (BPA) as one of the substances classified as a substance of very high concern (SVHC).

Traceability : Parliament recommended that all FCMs, whether harmonised or non-harmonised, are accompanied by a declaration of conformity (DoC) and the appropriate documentation. It insisted that imported FCMs from third countries must conform to EU standards, thus safeguarding public health and ensuring fair competition.

The Commission is called upon to establish mandatory labelling of the intended presence of nanomaterials in FCMs and to establish mandatory labelling of the composition of the FCMs.

Compliance, enforcement and controls : Parliament stressed the importance of developing EU guidelines for FCMs which would facilitate a harmonised and uniform implementation and better enforcement in the Member States. Other non-legislative policy options, such as the experience of industry self-assessment, should supplement measures to improve the enforcement of the Framework Regulation on FCMs.

The Commission is called upon to ensure that the Member States that have not already done so impose an obligation on all companies producing or importing Food Contact Materials to officially register their business activity .

Member States should increase the frequency and efficiency of official controls , based on the risk of non-compliance as well as on the health risks involved.

Lastly, Parliament called for more effective cooperation and coordination between the Member States and the Commission on the early warning system for foodstuffs and feedingstuffs, so that risks to public health can be dealt with quickly and effectively.

Documents
2016/10/06
   EP - End of procedure in Parliament
2016/10/05
   EP - Debate in Parliament
2016/07/18
   EP - Committee report tabled for plenary
Details

The Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety adopted the own-initiative report by Christel SCHALDEMOSE (S&D, DK) on the implementation of the Food Contact Materials (FCMs) Regulation ((EC) No 1935/2004.

Members acknowledged that the Framework Regulation (EC) No 1935/2004 constitutes a solid legal basis, the objectives of which remain relevant. They considered that the adoption of specific measures to overcome shortcomings that exist in the implementation and enforcement of the legislation in place are needed.

Specific measures : the Framework Regulation lists 17 food contact materials and articles (FCMs) which may be covered by specific measures. Out of the above 17, only 4 materials are subject to specific EU measures: plastics (including recycled plastics), ceramics, regenerated cellulose, and active and intelligent materials.

The other 13 materials listed in Annex I, the possibility remains for Member States to adopt national provisions.

While the major focus should be on the adoption of specific measures for those 13 materials not yet regulated at EU level, all relevant stakeholders point out that shortcomings exist in the implementation and enforcement of the legislation in place .

Members pointed out that, given the prevalence of the materials referred to on the EU market and the risk they pose to human health, the Commission should forthwith prioritise the drawing-up of specific EU measures for paper and board, varnishes and coatings, metals and alloys, printing inks and adhesives .

The report noted that special attention needs to be paid to those food contact materials – whether directly or indirectly in contact with food – with a higher risk of migration, such as materials surrounding liquids and high-fat foods, and to materials that are in contact with food for a long period of time.

Members urged the Commission, when drawing up the measures required, to take account of the European Implementation Assessment conducted by the European Parliament’s Research Service (DG EPRS) and of the national measures which are already in force or are being prepared.

Risk assessment : aware of the important role played by EFSA (European Food and Safety Authority) in the risk assessment of substances for use in FCMs regulated by specific measures; Members called on the Commission to increase the level of funding for EFSA . They called on EFSA and the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) to cooperate and coordinate their work more closely.

The report stressed the need to:

continue with further scientific research into non-intentionally added substances (‘NIAS’) as, in contrast to known hazardous substances, their identity and structure, especially in plastics, are often unknown; extend the concept of vulnerable groups to pregnant and breastfeeding women and to include the potential effects of low-dose exposure and non-monotonic dose responses in the risk assessment criteria.

Members regretted that EFSA, in its current risk assessment procedure, does not take account of the so-called ‘ cocktail effect ’ or the effect of multiple concurrent and cumulative exposures from FCMs and other sources, which can cause adverse effects even if levels of the individual substances in the mixture are low. They exhorted the EFSA to do so in future.

The Commission is called upon to ensure:

ensure coherence between the regulations on FCMs and biocidal products and to clarify the roles of ECHA and EFSA in this respect; better coordination and a more coherent approach between the REACH and FCM legislation , in particular as regards substances classified as CMRs (categories 1A, 1B and 2) or SVHCs (extremely concerning) under REACH.

Traceability : Members recommended that all FCMs, whether harmonised or non-harmonised, are accompanied by a declaration of conformity (DoC) and the appropriate documentation. They regretted, however, that, even when they are mandatory, DoCs are not always available for enforcement purposes, and their quality is not always high enough to ensure that they are a reliable source of compliance documentation.

The report insisted that imported FCMs from third countries must conform to EU standards, thus safeguarding public health and ensuring fair competition.

The Commission is called upon to establish mandatory labelling of the intended presence of nanomaterials in FCMs and to establish mandatory labelling of the composition of the FCMs.

Compliance, enforcement and controls : Members stressed the importance of developing EU guidelines for FCMs which would facilitate a harmonised and uniform implementation and better enforcement in the Member States. Other non-legislative policy options, such as the experience of industry self-assessment, should supplement measures to improve the enforcement of the Framework Regulation on FCMs.

The Commission are called upon to ensure that the Member States that have not already done so impose an obligation on all companies producing or importing Food Contact Materials to officially register their business activity .

Member States should increase the frequency and efficiency of official controls , based on the risk of non-compliance as well as on the health risks involved.

Lastly, the report called for more effective cooperation and coordination between the Member States and the Commission on the early warning system for foodstuffs and feedingstuffs, so that risks to public health can be dealt with quickly and effectively.

Documents
2016/07/12
   EP - Vote in committee
2016/06/07
   EP - Amendments tabled in committee
Documents
2016/04/26
   EP - Committee draft report
Documents
2015/10/29
   EP - Committee referral announced in Parliament
2015/09/02
   EP - SCHALDEMOSE Christel (S&D) appointed as rapporteur in ENVI

Documents

Activities

Votes

A8-0237/2016 - Christel Schaldemose - Am 4 #

2016/10/06 Outcome: -: 522, +: 72, 0: 20
EE IE MT CY LT LU LV SI FI NL HR AT DK EL HU BG SE SK CZ BE PT IT FR RO ES PL GB DE
Total
3
8
6
5
8
6
6
8
11
21
9
18
10
17
18
14
16
13
16
18
17
60
62
24
44
45
49
81
icon: ENF ENF
31

Netherlands ENF

3

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Poland ENF

Against (1)

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
12

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Poland NI

1

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
44

Ireland GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

1

Italy GUE/NGL

3

France GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
41

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

France Verts/ALE

4

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

3
icon: ECR ECR
48

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Belgium ECR

2

Italy ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
63

Estonia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Portugal ALDE

2

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
160

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

1

Malta S&D

For (1)

3

Cyprus S&D

2

Lithuania S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

Against (2)

2

Croatia S&D

2
3

Hungary S&D

3

Bulgaria S&D

2

Czechia S&D

3
icon: PPE PPE
178

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3

Finland PPE

Against (1)

1

Croatia PPE

3

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
3

A8-0237/2016 - Christel Schaldemose - Am 5 #

2016/10/06 Outcome: -: 538, +: 61, 0: 14
EE LV CY MT LU LT IE SI PL FI HR AT DK EL SE HU BG SK NL PT BE CZ RO FR ES IT GB DE
Total
3
6
5
6
6
8
8
8
45
11
9
18
10
18
16
18
14
13
21
17
18
16
24
62
44
60
49
79
icon: ENF ENF
31

Poland ENF

For (1)

1

Netherlands ENF

3

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1
icon: NI NI
12

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Hungary NI

Abstain (1)

3

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2
icon: ECR ECR
49

Latvia ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

2

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

Bulgaria ECR

2

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Belgium ECR

2

Czechia ECR

2

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1

Italy ECR

Abstain (1)

1
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
45

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Ireland GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

3

Portugal GUE/NGL

Against (1)

4

Czechia GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

France GUE/NGL

3

Italy GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Lithuania EFDD

Against (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1

Sweden EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Against (1)

1

France EFDD

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
41

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

France Verts/ALE

4

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

3
icon: ALDE ALDE
63

Estonia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Portugal ALDE

2

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
160

Cyprus S&D

2

Malta S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

1

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

1

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Croatia S&D

2
3

Hungary S&D

3

Bulgaria S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

Against (2)

2

Czechia S&D

3
icon: PPE PPE
175

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Lithuania PPE

2

Finland PPE

Against (1)

1

Croatia PPE

3

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
3

A8-0237/2016 - Christel Schaldemose - Am 6 #

2016/10/06 Outcome: -: 506, +: 69, 0: 36
EE IE LV CY MT LT LU NL SI FI HR AT DK EL SE CZ HU BG SK PT BE IT FR RO GB ES PL DE
Total
3
8
5
5
6
8
6
21
8
11
9
18
10
17
16
16
17
14
13
17
18
60
62
24
49
44
45
81
icon: ENF ENF
31

Netherlands ENF

3

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Poland ENF

For (1)

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

1

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: NI NI
11

Hungary NI

2

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
45

Ireland GUE/NGL

For (1)

Abstain (1)

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Sweden GUE/NGL

Abstain (1)

1

Czechia GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

Against (1)

4

Italy GUE/NGL

3

France GUE/NGL

3

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
41

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

France Verts/ALE

4

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

3
icon: ECR ECR
49

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

2

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Belgium ECR

2

Italy ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
63

Estonia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Portugal ALDE

2

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

Against (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
159

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Malta S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Lithuania S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

Against (2)

2

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Finland S&D

2

Croatia S&D

2
3

Czechia S&D

3

Hungary S&D

3

Bulgaria S&D

2
icon: PPE PPE
176

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Latvia PPE

2

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

3

Finland PPE

Against (1)

1

Croatia PPE

3

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
3

A8-0237/2016 - Christel Schaldemose - Am 9 #

2016/10/06 Outcome: +: 346, -: 239, 0: 29
FR IT ES EL GB BE PT AT DE SE DK RO MT CY FI IE LT LU EE SK HU HR LV SI NL CZ BG PL
Total
61
60
45
19
48
18
17
18
80
16
10
24
6
5
11
8
8
6
3
13
17
9
6
8
21
16
14
46
icon: S&D S&D
159

Malta S&D

3

Cyprus S&D

2

Ireland S&D

For (1)

1

Lithuania S&D

1

Luxembourg S&D

For (1)

1

Croatia S&D

2

Slovenia S&D

For (1)

1

Netherlands S&D

2

Czechia S&D

3

Bulgaria S&D

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
44

France GUE/NGL

2

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

For (1)

4

Sweden GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

For (1)

1

Ireland GUE/NGL

2

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Czechia GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
41

France Verts/ALE

4

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Luxembourg Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Estonia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Croatia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

For (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

1
icon: ENF ENF
31

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Netherlands ENF

3

Poland ENF

For (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

France EFDD

1

Sweden EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: NI NI
12

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Hungary NI

2

Poland NI

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
63

United Kingdom ALDE

Against (1)

1

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Sweden ALDE

3

Denmark ALDE

3

Romania ALDE

2

Ireland ALDE

For (1)

1

Lithuania ALDE

3

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Estonia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1
icon: ECR ECR
50

Italy ECR

Against (1)

1

Greece ECR

For (1)

1

Belgium ECR

2

Denmark ECR

2

Romania ECR

For (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Slovakia ECR

Against (1)

Abstain (1)

3

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Czechia ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2
icon: PPE PPE
177

Belgium PPE

Against (1)

3

Denmark PPE

For (1)

1

Malta PPE

Against (1)

3

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Finland PPE

1

Lithuania PPE

2

Luxembourg PPE

For (1)

Against (2)

3

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Croatia PPE

3

A8-0237/2016 - Christel Schaldemose - Am 7 #

2016/10/06 Outcome: -: 497, +: 69, 0: 43
EE IE LU CY MT LT LV FI NL SI HR AT DK BG HU EL SK CZ PT SE BE IT FR RO GB ES PL DE
Total
3
8
5
5
6
8
6
11
20
8
9
18
10
14
16
18
13
16
17
16
18
60
59
24
48
45
46
81
icon: ENF ENF
31

Netherlands ENF

3

Belgium ENF

For (1)

1

Romania ENF

1

Poland ENF

For (1)

1

Germany ENF

For (1)

1
icon: EFDD EFDD
36

Lithuania EFDD

For (1)

1

Czechia EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

Sweden EFDD

Abstain (1)

1

France EFDD

1

Poland EFDD

1
icon: NI NI
11

Hungary NI

2

France NI

For (1)

Against (1)

2

United Kingdom NI

Against (1)

1

Poland NI

Against (1)

1

Germany NI

2
icon: GUE/NGL GUE/NGL
43

Ireland GUE/NGL

2

Cyprus GUE/NGL

2

Finland GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Netherlands GUE/NGL

3

Czechia GUE/NGL

1

Portugal GUE/NGL

Against (1)

4

Sweden GUE/NGL

Against (1)

1

Italy GUE/NGL

3

France GUE/NGL

1

United Kingdom GUE/NGL

1
icon: Verts/ALE Verts/ALE
40

Estonia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Latvia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Finland Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Netherlands Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Slovenia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Croatia Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Austria Verts/ALE

3

Denmark Verts/ALE

Against (1)

1

Hungary Verts/ALE

2

Sweden Verts/ALE

3

Belgium Verts/ALE

2

France Verts/ALE

Against (1)

4

United Kingdom Verts/ALE

3
icon: ECR ECR
50

Latvia ECR

Against (1)

1

Finland ECR

Against (1)

2

Netherlands ECR

Against (1)

1

Croatia ECR

Against (1)

1

Denmark ECR

2

Bulgaria ECR

2

Greece ECR

Against (1)

1

Slovakia ECR

Abstain (1)

3

Czechia ECR

2

Belgium ECR

2

Italy ECR

Abstain (1)

1

Romania ECR

Against (1)

1
icon: ALDE ALDE
62

Estonia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Ireland ALDE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg ALDE

Against (1)

1

Latvia ALDE

1

Slovenia ALDE

Against (1)

1

Croatia ALDE

2

Austria ALDE

Against (1)

1

Denmark ALDE

3

Portugal ALDE

2

Romania ALDE

2

United Kingdom ALDE

Abstain (1)

1
icon: S&D S&D
158

Ireland S&D

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg S&D

Against (1)

1

Cyprus S&D

2

Malta S&D

Abstain (1)

3

Lithuania S&D

1

Finland S&D

2

Netherlands S&D

Against (2)

2

Slovenia S&D

Against (1)

1

Croatia S&D

2
3

Bulgaria S&D

For (1)

Against (1)

2

Hungary S&D

3

Czechia S&D

3
icon: PPE PPE
177

Estonia PPE

Against (1)

1

Luxembourg PPE

3

Cyprus PPE

Against (1)

1

Lithuania PPE

2

Finland PPE

1

Croatia PPE

3

Denmark PPE

Against (1)

1
3

A8-0237/2016 - Christel Schaldemose - Am 1 #

2016/10/06 Outcome: -: 561, +: 40, 0: 12
EE CY MT IE LU LV LT SI FI HR AT DK EL HU SK BG PT NL BE CZ SE RO FR ES PL GB IT DE
Total
3
5
6
8
6
6
8
8
11
9
18
10
18
17
13
14
17
21
18
16
16
24
60
45
46
48
60
81