Kim VAN SPARRENTAK
Political Group Memberships
Voting Statistics
Group Alignment
How often this MEP votes with their political group majority.
Rebel Subjects
Topics where this MEP most often breaks with their political group.
Procedures
170 votesFinancing for development – ahead of the Fourth International Conference on Financing for Development in Seville
Demand increased development cooperation funding to achieve USD 1.3 trillion annually by 2035, including innovative financing and debt relief.
Strengthening rural areas in the EU through cohesion policy
Prioritise cohesion policy funding towards rural areas to address demographic decline, improve services, and modernise agriculture.
Amendments to Parliament’s Rules of Procedure concerning the declaration of input (Article 8 of Annex I to the Rules of Procedure)
Require rapporteurs to list interest groups and third-country representatives providing input on their reports.
Resolution on the old challenges and new commercial practices in the internal market
Fund customs authorities and market surveillance to combat illicit goods sold on e-commerce platforms.
Banking Union – annual report 2024
Complete the Banking Union by establishing a European Deposit Insurance Scheme to protect depositors and reduce systemic risk.
Written Explanations
Written explanations of vote submitted after plenary sessions.
Drones and new systems of warfare – the EU‘s need to adapt to be fit for today‘s security challenges
GL-PvdA supports this report, as it offers valuable perspectives on adapting the Member States’ armed forces, EU programmes and institutions to challenges in relation to the integration of drones, anti-drone measures and other innovative systems of warfare. The geopolitical situation and swift changes in global alliances merit supporting the overall report. However, GL-PvdA explicitly distances itself from the Frontex references in paragraphs 39, 323 and 324. We strongly oppose this report’s language advocating for an of Frontex mandate expansion, to include military capabilities and tasks, which dangerously blurs the line between defence and border management. Due to previous human right abuses by Frontex, affording quasi-military powers entails significant risks, and requires a radical shift in its modus operandi, oversight, and legal framework. While limited information exchange between Frontex and armed forces, in line with data protection and fundamental rights obligations, may be pertinent, the mandate for territorial defence must remain the exclusive responsibility of our armed forces, that have clearly defined democratic and legal frameworks. Moreover, the European Commission foresees a revision of the Frontex Regulation in 2026. Taking a Parliamentary position on such a sensitive matter is premature.
No written explanations available.