We can't say anything concrete about how Anthony Chisholm voted on increasing fishing restrictions
How Anthony Chisholm voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase fishing restrictions so that fish populations are sustainable
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing fishing restrictions” which Anthony Chisholm could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Anthony Chisholm on this policy.
| Division | Anthony Chisholm | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing fishing restrictions” which Anthony Chisholm could have attended.
| Division | Anthony Chisholm | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
4th Dec 2018, 4:46 PM – Senate Motions - East Coast Inshore Fin Fish Fishery - Add conditions to accreditation |
absent | Yes |
22nd Jun 2017, 12:24 PM – Senate Motions - Aquaculture Industry - Okehampton Bay salmon farm |
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 Anthony Chisholm was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.