(sorry that this is quite a complicated multi-lingual document of record, you might find a better explanatipn somewhere else of who voted and for what)
what you are probably trying to get at , is the internal discussions that lead to legislation being proposed, a three-way discussion!
the trilogue (internal informal discussion with tracked changes) inside the Commission, with the Council and with the European Parliament is generally available. (there was quite a lot of Article 11 & 13 trilogue discussions pro/contra available on the internet, such that the final voting was not a suprise, and the final texts are clear (and probably quite reasonable when we see the individual national EU governments law proposals over the next two years)
read this page http://www.europarl.europa.eu/ordina...otiations.html especially the [+] Trilogues explained section
Things that you got slightly wrong, but I agree that it can be a bit confusing with the different Institutions and Agencies of the European Union - this page might help you? https://europa.eu/european-union/abo...ions-bodies_en
the ECB, European Central Bank will never reveal things that they do not wish to reveal, just ask the various national banks, their information is too market sensitive for their informal internal discussions to be investigated. Mark Carney, Bank of England, says "no comment" however the ECB does reveal how they vote and who can vote! https://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/orga/d...rights.en.html
the ECJ , European Court of Justice, based in Luxembourg, does publish all their voting, they first study an issue, make a preliminary suggestion as to which way the case might go when they have more time - then finally vote with their array of many national judges on each of the busy cases that they consider (usually up to 15 of the 28 judges vote on the case). https://europa.eu/european-union/abo...urt-justice_en
here's a case that was solved this week about someone who bought a Mattress online, then returned it in 2014, the German shop refused a thousand euro refund. The ECJ gave a preliminary ruling in 2018, but now have given the final ruling.
(for further reading try s t a t e w a t c h (dot) o r g) but seriously don't believe everything that you read; I was going to use wikipedia URL's here, but after reading them considered that they were not entirely accurate (and might anyways be different by the time that you read this) so I went to the actual pages of the institutions about which you seem to have a query. I once even phoned the European Parliament with a question, and they did get back to me!
Less Niggle Farange please, do a bit more research