We can't say anything concrete about how Wayne Swan voted on re-approving/ re-registering agvet chemicals
How Wayne Swan voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should, in relation to agricultural and veterinary ('agvet') chemicals, implement a mandatory scheme for the re-approval of active constituents and re-registration of chemical products to ensure their ongoing safety
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for re-approving/ re-registering agvet chemicals” which Wayne Swan could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Wayne Swan on this policy.
| Division | Wayne Swan | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
15th May 2013, 1:43 PM – Representatives Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Agree to the bill |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for re-approving/ re-registering agvet chemicals” which Wayne Swan could have attended.
| Division | Wayne Swan | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
15th May 2013, 1:36 PM – Representatives Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Remove re-registration process |
No | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Wayne Swan 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.