We can't say anything concrete about how Fiona Nash voted on letting environmental groups challenge the legality of certain government decisions
How Fiona Nash voted compared to someone who agrees that environmental and conservation groups should be able to challenge the legality of federal government decisions made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 (EPBC Act) (in other words, they should have standing to seek judicial review under that Act)
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for letting environmental groups challenge the legality of certain government decisions” which Fiona Nash could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Fiona Nash on this policy.
| Division | Fiona Nash | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for letting environmental groups challenge the legality of certain government decisions” which Fiona Nash could have attended.
| Division | Fiona Nash | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
11th Nov 2015 – Senate Motions - Legal System - Stop environmental groups from challenging government decisions |
absent | No |
20th Aug 2015, 12:18 PM – Senate Motions - Galilee Basin - Stop legal actions by anti-coal activists |
Yes | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Fiona Nash 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.