Compare how Laurie Ferguson and Jill Hall voted on stopping tax avoidance or aggressive tax minimisation

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 stopping tax avoidance or aggressive tax minimisation” which either Laurie Ferguson or Jill Hall could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Laurie Ferguson and Jill Hall 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 Laurie Ferguson Jill Hall Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for stopping tax avoidance or aggressive tax minimisation” which either Laurie Ferguson or Jill Hall 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 Laurie Ferguson Jill Hall Supporters vote

14th Sep 2015, 6:08 PM – Representatives Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Better Targeting the Income Tax Transparency Laws) Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea

No No No

14th Sep 2015, 6:00 PM – Representatives Tax and Superannuation Laws Amendment (Better Targeting the Income Tax Transparency Laws) Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Against the bill

Yes Yes Yes

6th Jun 2013, 11:46 AM – Representatives Tax Laws Amendment (2013 Measures No. 2) Bill 2013 - Consideration in Detail - Reject transparency provisions

No No No