We can't say anything concrete about how Margaret May voted on letting all MPs or Senators speak in Parliament (procedural)
How Margaret May voted compared to someone who agrees that Members of Parliament (MPs) and Senators should vote against all motions that stop an MP or Senator from speaking (that is, motions that the MP or Senator 'be no longer heard')
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for letting all MPs or Senators speak in Parliament (procedural)” which Margaret May could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Margaret May on this policy.
| Division | Margaret May | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
19th Mar 2008, 9:16 AM – Representatives Motions — Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008 — That the member be no longer heard |
absent | No |
19th Mar 2008, 9:07 AM – Representatives Motions - Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008 - That the member be no longer heard |
absent | No |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for letting all MPs or Senators speak in Parliament (procedural)” which Margaret May could have attended.
| Division | Margaret May | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
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 Margaret May was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.