We can't say anything concrete about how Sue Boyce voted on using natural resource wealth for the benefit of all Australians
How Sue Boyce voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should use the wealth generated by mining for the benefit of Australian citizens, as encouraged by the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) Principles
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for using natural resource wealth for the benefit of all Australians” which Sue Boyce could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Sue Boyce on this policy.
| Division | Sue Boyce | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for using natural resource wealth for the benefit of all Australians” which Sue Boyce could have attended.
| Division | Sue Boyce | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
25th Mar 2014, 1:51 PM – Senate Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 - Second Reading - Share mining boom benefits |
absent | Yes |
22nd Mar 2012, 1:29 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Use Queensland mining wealth to benefit all Queenslanders |
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 Sue Boyce was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.