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
194 votesResolution on democracy and human rights in Thailand, notably the lese-majesty law and deportation of Uyghur refugees
Demand Thailand halt deportation of refugees to countries where their lives are at risk and reform lese-majesty law.
Resolution on the white paper on the future of European defence
Fund joint development, production, and procurement of drone and anti-drone systems for EU security.
Assessment of the implementation of Horizon Europe in view of its interim evaluation and recommendations for the 10th Research Framework Programme
Fund research and innovation with a significantly increased budget targeting 75% of excellent proposals to achieve 3% GDP spending on R&D.
The European Social Fund Plus post-2027
Fund social inclusion, employment, skills development, and poverty reduction programs through the European Social Fund Plus post-2027.
Verification of credentials
Validate mandates of listed MEPs who submitted required declarations and whose election wasn't disputed by national authorities.
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.