We can't say anything concrete about how Maria Kovacic voted on increasing Aboriginal land rights
How Maria Kovacic voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land rights by, for example, increasing their legal recognition and protection
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing Aboriginal land rights” which Maria Kovacic could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Maria Kovacic on this policy.
| Division | Maria Kovacic | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing Aboriginal land rights” which Maria Kovacic could have attended.
| Division | Maria Kovacic | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
24th Jun 2024, 4:40 PM – Senate Matters of Urgency - Native Title - Great Keppel Island |
Yes | No |
30th Nov 2023, 10:08 AM – Senate Water Amendment (Restoring Our Rivers) Bill 2023 - Indigenous peoples |
absent | Yes |
28th Nov 2023, 1:00 PM – Senate Water Amendment (Restoring Our Rivers) Bill 2023 - Second Reading - First Peoples |
absent | Yes |
12th Sep 2023, 3:53 PM – Senate Committees - Legal and Constitutional Affairs Legislation Committee; Reference - For an inquiry into adding a sunset clause on Native Title |
absent | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Maria Kovacic 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.