We can't say anything concrete about how Steve Martin voted on protecting Australian sovereignty in trade agreements
How Steve Martin voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should ensure that Australian sovereignty always comes first when signing trade agreements so that the government can protect Australian interests (including its workforce and industries) without risking legal action from foreign investors under provisions such as investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS) clauses
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting Australian sovereignty in trade agreements” which Steve Martin could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Steve Martin on this policy.
| Division | Steve Martin | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
12th Nov 2018, 12:17 PM – Senate A Fair Go for Australians in Trade Bill 2018 [No. 2] - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
17th Oct 2018, 11:30 AM – Senate Customs Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation) Bill 2018 - in Committee - Commencement |
absent | Yes |
16th Oct 2018, 6:49 PM – Senate Customs Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation) Bill 2018 - in Committee - Commencement |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting Australian sovereignty in trade agreements” which Steve Martin could have attended.
| Division | Steve Martin | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
17th Oct 2018, 12:32 PM – Senate Customs Amendment (Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership Implementation) Bill 2018 and another - in Committee - Sunset clause |
absent | Yes |
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 Steve Martin was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.