We can't say anything concrete about how Peter Dutton voted on protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats
How Peter Dutton voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should protect threatened forest and bushland habitats from logging.
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Peter Dutton could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Peter Dutton on this policy.
| Division | Peter Dutton | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Peter Dutton could have attended.
| Division | Peter Dutton | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
29th May 2024, 10:44 AM – Representatives Illegal Logging Prohibition Amendment (Strengthening Measures to Prevent Illegal Timber Trade) Bill 2024 - Report from Federation Chamber - End native forest logging |
absent | Yes |
9th Mar 2023, 9:40 AM – Representatives National Reconstruction Fund Corporation Bill 2022 - Consideration in Detail - Prohibited investments |
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 Peter Dutton was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.