We can't say anything concrete about how Malarndirri McCarthy voted on a Royal Commission into Violence and Abuse against People with Disability
How Malarndirri McCarthy voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should establish a Royal Commission to investigate and report on violence and abuse against people with disability in light of the the disproportionately high number of reports of abuse of Australians with a disability by people who are meant to care for them
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for a Royal Commission into Violence and Abuse against People with Disability” which Malarndirri McCarthy could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Malarndirri McCarthy on this policy.
| Division | Malarndirri McCarthy | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for a Royal Commission into Violence and Abuse against People with Disability” which Malarndirri McCarthy could have attended.
| Division | Malarndirri McCarthy | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
14th Feb 2019, 12:13 PM – Senate Motions - Disability Services - Establish a royal commission |
Yes | Yes |
4th Dec 2018, 4:25 PM – Senate Motions - Disability Services - Establish a royal commission |
absent | Yes |
19th Sep 2018, 4:47 PM – Senate Motions - Aged Care - Royal Commission and people with disability |
absent | Yes |
29th Mar 2017, 4:14 PM – Senate Motions - Institutional Care - For a royal commission |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Malarndirri McCarthy 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.