We can't say anything concrete about how Christopher Back voted on increasing political transparency
How Christopher Back voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase transparency requirements for political parties (for example, requiring full and prompt disclosure of any political donations on easy-to-search public websites)
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing political transparency” which Christopher Back could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Christopher Back on this policy.
| Division | Christopher Back | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
11th Mar 2009, 12:19 PM – Senate Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Political Donations and Other Measures) Bill 2008 [2009] - Second Reading - Agree to the bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing political transparency” which Christopher Back could have attended.
| Division | Christopher Back | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
3rd Dec 2013 – Senate Motions - Political Donations - Disclosure and ban on overseas donations |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case Christopher Back was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.