We can't say anything concrete about how David Fawcett voted on pill testing
How David Fawcett voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should develop and implement a pill testing policy to reduce the risk of death and/or injury caused by taking illicit drugs
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for pill testing” which David Fawcett could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of David Fawcett on this policy.
| Division | David Fawcett | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for pill testing” which David Fawcett could have attended.
| Division | David Fawcett | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
13th Feb 2019, 4:16 PM – Senate Motions - Illicit Drugs - Pill testing |
absent | Yes |
5th Sep 2017, 5:24 PM – Senate Motions - International Overdose Awareness Day - Address harms of drug use |
absent | Yes |
13th Feb 2017, 4:05 PM – Senate Motions - Illicit Drugs - Pill testing |
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 David Fawcett was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.