We can't say anything concrete about how Chris Ellison voted on protecting whistleblowers
How Chris Ellison voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should introduce legislation to protect people who disclose information for the benefit of the public interest and protect the journalists who report it
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Chris Ellison could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Chris Ellison on this policy.
| Division | Chris Ellison | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Chris Ellison could have attended.
| Division | Chris Ellison | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
8th Feb 2007, 10:37 AM – Senate Motions - Government Accountability and Transparency - Canadian bill |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Chris Ellison 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.