We can't say anything concrete about how Sam McMahon voted on increasing restrictions on gambling
How Sam McMahon voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase restrictions on the gambling industry in order to address the issue of problem gambling
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing restrictions on gambling” which Sam McMahon could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Sam McMahon on this policy.
| Division | Sam McMahon | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing restrictions on gambling” which Sam McMahon could have attended.
| Division | Sam McMahon | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
29th Jul 2019, 4:03 PM – Senate Motions - Gambling - A new inquiry |
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 Sam McMahon was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.