Compare how Anthony Chisholm and Zed Seselja voted on targeting foreign interference in Australia
Anthony Chisholm
Australian Labor Party Senator for Queensland since July 2016
Zed Seselja
Former Liberal Party Senator for ACT September 2013 – May 2022
How they voted compared with each other and someone who agrees that the federal government should address the issue of foreign interference in Australia by, for example, introducing new offences against acts such as sabotage, treason and espionage
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 targeting foreign interference in Australia” which either Anthony Chisholm or Zed Seselja could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Anthony Chisholm and Zed Seselja 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 | Anthony Chisholm | Zed Seselja | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|---|
28th Jun 2018, 7:22 PM – Senate Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Bill 2018 and another - Third Reading - Pass the bills |
Yes | Yes | Yes |
28th Jun 2018, 10:21 AM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018 and another - Second Reading - Agree with bills' main idea |
absent | Yes | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for targeting foreign interference in Australia” which either Anthony Chisholm or Zed Seselja 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 | Anthony Chisholm | Zed Seselja | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|---|
4th Dec 2019, 4:09 PM – Senate Committees - Economics References Committee - Reference |
Yes | No | Yes |
15th Aug 2018, 4:01 PM – Senate Motions - Confucius Institute - Foreign influence |
No | absent | Yes |
28th Jun 2018, 6:20 PM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018 - in Committee - Support the new offence of sabotage |
Yes | Yes | Yes |
27th Jun 2018, 9:51 AM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 and another - First Reading - Consider bills together |
Yes | Yes | Yes |
14th Jun 2017, 4:26 PM – Senate Motions - Influence of Foreign Agents - Royal Commission |
absent | absent | Yes |