We can't say anything concrete about how Meryl Swanson voted on increasing transparency of ministers' use of governmental power
How Meryl Swanson voted compared to someone who agrees that there should be transparency surrounding how federal ministers use the powers given to them by legislation
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing transparency of ministers' use of governmental power” which Meryl Swanson could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Meryl Swanson on this policy.
| Division | Meryl Swanson | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing transparency of ministers' use of governmental power” which Meryl Swanson could have attended.
| Division | Meryl Swanson | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
7th Dec 2020, 5:07 PM – Representatives Foreign Investment Reform (Protecting Australia's National Security) Bill 2020 and another - Consideration in Detail - Transparency |
Yes | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Meryl Swanson has only voted once on this policy and it wasn't on a "strong" vote. So it's not possible to draw a clear conclusion about their position.
This could be because there were simply not many relevant divisions (formal votes) during the time they've been in parliament (most votes happen on "the voices", so we simply have no decent record) or they were absent for votes that could have contributed to their voting record.