We can't say anything concrete about how Craig Emerson voted on re-approving/ re-registering agvet chemicals
How Craig Emerson 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 Craig Emerson could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Craig Emerson on this policy.
| Division | Craig Emerson | 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 Craig Emerson could have attended.
| Division | Craig Emerson | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
15th May 2013, 1:36 PM – Representatives Agricultural and Veterinary Chemicals Legislation Amendment Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Remove re-registration process |
absent | No |
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 Craig Emerson was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.