We can't say anything concrete about how Jodie Belyea voted on considering motions on Gaza (2023-24) (procedural)
How Jodie Belyea voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should suspend the usual procedural rules - known as standing orders - that would otherwise prevent our representatives from considering and voting on motions related to the humanitarian disaster in Gaza that began in October 2023 and which is now the subject of an ongoing case in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in which South Africa is accusing Israel of genocide
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for considering motions on Gaza (2023-24) (procedural)” which Jodie Belyea could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Jodie Belyea on this policy.
| Division | Jodie Belyea | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for considering motions on Gaza (2023-24) (procedural)” which Jodie Belyea could have attended.
| Division | Jodie Belyea | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
18th Mar 2024, 12:36 PM – Representatives Motions - Middle East - Let another vote take place |
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 Jodie Belyea was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.