Unanimity at the ballot: 100 % of voters believe every EU country should be required to take its share of asylum seekers. No opposition, no hesitation.
The agreement is identical among men, women and voters with no declared gender, and every age bracket represented, from 18-24 to over-65, votes the same way. On one of the most divisive questions in European public debate, no profile stands apart.
The debate, however, is far from unanimous, and that is what makes this round interesting. The voices that accompany the vote defend solidarity and shared effort: avoiding a situation where two or three countries handle everything simply because they sit on the border, which is fair neither to them nor to anyone else.
The same argument returns in more institutional form: fair distribution would share responsibilities and make overall management better. One voice widens the frame further: solidarity should operate between member states, but also towards asylum seekers themselves.
The contradiction, absent from the vote, appears in a reply: every country has the right to decide who enters, otherwise what is the point of being a country? That is the sovereignty argument, put by someone who nonetheless did not shift the result.
A final voice, undecided, raises the practical question nobody settles: the principle of distribution seems logical, but how do you compel a country that refuses? A fine, and then what? The consensus in the vote therefore stops exactly where implementation begins.