Compare how David Feeney and Ursula Stephens voted on increasing scrutiny of unions
David Feeney
Former Australian Labor Party Representative for Batman September 2013 – February 2018
Ursula Stephens
Former Australian Labor Party Senator for NSW July 2002 – June 2014
How they voted compared with each other and someone who agrees that the federal government should increase scrutiny of unions and employer organisations by, for example, creating a commission to monitor them and applying the same standards of disclosure to them as to corporations as well as the same penalties for misconduct
Now this is where it gets a bit tricky… Two people might vote the same way on votes they both attended, so their votes are 100% in agreement. They might also have voted in a way we’d describe differently when looking at all of one person's votes. If the other person didn’t or couldn’t have attended those votes we leave those out of the comparison. Because that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it?
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing scrutiny of unions” which either David Feeney or Ursula Stephens could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of David Feeney and Ursula Stephens on this policy. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".
| Division | David Feeney | Ursula Stephens | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|---|
19th Oct 2016, 11:13 AM – Representatives Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2014 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
No | - | Yes |
14th May 2014, 11:15 AM – Senate Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2013 - Second Reading - Agree to the bill's main idea |
- | No | Yes |
12th Dec 2013, 9:14 AM – Representatives Fair Work (Registered Organisations) Amendment Bill 2013 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea |
No | - | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing scrutiny of unions” which either David Feeney or Ursula Stephens could have attended. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".
| Division | David Feeney | Ursula Stephens | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|---|
20th Aug 2012, 3:54 PM – Senate Motions - Health Services Union - Greater penalties for misconduct |
No | No | Yes |
18th Jun 2012, 4:23 PM – Senate Motions - Registered Organisations - Accountability & transparency |
No | No | Yes |