The text addresses the need to accelerate the authorisation process for biological plant protection products in the EU. Parliament adopted the text as its official position, calling for a harmonised framework with a clear EU-wide definition of biological control and tailored risk-assessment methods. It also asks for better use of mutual recognition between member states and adequate resources for EFSA and national authorities.
How the vote unfolded · 3 ballots
Before the final vote, MEPs decided on 2 parts of the text voted on separately (2 adopted).
split votes by Members.
adoptedrejectedlapsedsquare = amendmentcircle = part of the textdecisive voteSolid = roll call (click for every MEP’s vote); faded = no individual positions
All 3 ballots in voting order
1.Paragraph 12 — part 1 of 2Part 1: ‘Calls on the Commission to consider extending the maximum period for the first approval and renewal of active substances exerting biological control to up to 25 years; calls on the Commission to establish and maintain a list of biological control products that, based on their profile, nature and mode of action, may be eligible for authorisation with an extended time frame of up to 25 years for the first authorisation; emphasises that such a list must not be closed and must reflect the most recent scientific standards and remain dynamic, meaning that inclusion on the list must not be considered permanent; calls on the Commission to periodically review and update the list in the light of new data or scientific developments;’A paragraph or amendment voted in separate parts, so groups can back one part and oppose another. requested by Members
A vote by raised hands. Only the outcome is recorded, not who voted how. — no individual
positions recorded
Adopted
2.Paragraph 12 — part 2 of 2Part 2: ‘calls on the Commission to assess potential conditions upon which, biological control active substances and products that have been shown to have no or negligible risk profile could be granted indefinite approval and authorisation;’A paragraph or amendment voted in separate parts, so groups can back one part and oppose another. requested by Members
A vote by raised hands. Only the outcome is recorded, not who voted how. — no individual
positions recorded
Adopted
3.Final vote — text as a whole12:42A10-0234/2025 – Alexander Bernhuber, Anna Strolenberg – Motion for a resolution (as a whole)
One day of voting in plenary. Each subject is a report, resolution, agreement or objection; they are grouped by kind of decision, and each group says what “adopted” means there.
The ballots
Members vote on amendments and on parts of the text first, then on the text as a whole. That final, decisive vote is the result shown at the top of each subject.
Who voted how
Only roll-call votes record each Member’s vote — open one for every name and the breakdown by group. A show of hands records the outcome only.
Document & procedure
Each subject rests on a document (a committee report, a motion, a Council or Commission text) and belongs to a procedure, the whole file that can span years.
Group badges
How most of a group voted: ✓ For · ✗ Against · – Abstained · ~ Split (no majority).
Codes in ballot labels
Am 27 — amendment 27
§ 5 — paragraph 5
§ 5/2, part 2 — a A paragraph or amendment voted in separate parts, so groups can back one part and oppose another., taken in parts
Am 3= 7= — identical amendments voted together
***I — Parliament’s first vote on a proposed EU law. It sets Parliament’s position for negotiations with the Council.; *** — Parliament can approve or reject the text, for example an international agreement, but cannot amend it.; * — Parliament gives its opinion on a proposal. The Council decides, but must wait for Parliament’s opinion.
Lapsed — Not put to a vote, because an earlier vote already settled the matter.