5 relevant divisions

Voted consistently for greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations

Something not right?

Voted generally for greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations

Something not right?

Voted a mixture of for and against greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations

Something not right?

Voted almost always against greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations

Something not right?

We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations

Something not right?

Relevant divisions

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations”. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of a person on this policy.

Division Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for greater public scrutiny of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations”.

Division Supporters vote

13th Oct 2015, 4:02 PM – Senate Motions — Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement

Yes

26th Mar 2015, 1:26 PM – Senate Motions - Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement - Undertake a cost benefit analysis

Yes

11th Feb 2015, 3:50 PM – Senate Motions — Request for more transparency in Trans-Pacific Partnership trade deal.

Yes

29th Oct 2014 – Senate Motions - Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement - Give members of Parliament access to the draft text

Yes

23rd Nov 2011 – Senate Motions — Trans-Pacific Partnership

Yes

If you know of other divisions that relate to this policy, you can add them in the Votes section of that division‘s page.