We can't say anything concrete about how Kate Chaney voted on increasing transparency of big business by making information public
How Kate Chaney voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal govenment should increase transparency in big business (that is, companies with an income equal or more than $100 million/year or, alternatively, $200 million/year) by making certain information public, including their total income and how much tax they paid
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing transparency of big business by making information public” which Kate Chaney could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Kate Chaney on this policy.
| Division | Kate Chaney | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
4th Aug 2022, 4:25 PM – Representatives Treasury Laws Amendment (2022 Measures No. 1) Bill 2022 - Consideration of Senate Message - Agree with amendments and so pass bill |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing transparency of big business by making information public” which Kate Chaney could have attended.
| Division | Kate Chaney | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
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 Kate Chaney was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.