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
18 votesChoice of performance indicators for audit and budgetary control in the context of financing measures to support the implementation of future European competitiveness
Require measurable indicators for EU-funded projects to ensure traceability, transparency, and auditability, especially for competitiveness and resilience measures.
Resolution seeking an opinion from the Court of Justice on the compatibility with the Treaties of the proposed Partnership Agreement between the European Union and its Member States, of the one part, and the Common Market of the South, the Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, of the other part, and the proposed Interim Agreement on Trade between the European Union, of the one part, and the Common Market of the South, the Argentine Republic, the Federative Republic of Brazil, the Republic of Paraguay and the Oriental Republic of Uruguay, of the other part
Request the Court of Justice to assess the EU-Mercosur agreement's compatibility with EU treaties regarding legal basis and precautionary principle.
Continued war crimes committed by the Russian Federation, notably killing Ukrainian prisoners of war
Relations between the EU and Saudi Arabia
Deepen cooperation with Saudi Arabia on energy, counterterrorism, and regional stability, while demanding human rights improvements and labour rights reforms.
Application of the Treaty provisions related to the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality and the role of national parliaments in the EU legislative process
Demand stricter justification from the Commission for EU legislative action, ensuring respect for Member State competences and avoiding disguised extensions of power.
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.