We can't say anything concrete about how Deborah O'Neill voted on increasing government funding to private bodies that provide certain services
How Deborah O'Neill voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase funding to private bodies that provide certain services otherwise provided by the government, such as education and health (for example, private universities)
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing government funding to private bodies that provide certain services” which Deborah O'Neill could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Deborah O'Neill on this policy.
| Division | Deborah O'Neill | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing government funding to private bodies that provide certain services” which Deborah O'Neill could have attended.
| Division | Deborah O'Neill | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
18th Jun 2015, 12:30 PM – Senate Motions - Higher Education - Extend funding to private universities and colleges |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Deborah O'Neill 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.