Compare how David Fawcett and Michael Danby voted on increasing investment in renewable energy
David Fawcett
Liberal Party Senator for SA since July 2011
Michael Danby
Former Australian Labor Party Representative for Melbourne Ports October 1998 – May 2019
How they voted compared with each other and someone who agrees that the federal government should increase investment in renewable energy technologies
Now this is where it gets a bit tricky… Two people might vote the same way on votes they both attended, so their votes are 100% in agreement. They might also have voted in a way we’d describe differently when looking at all of one person's votes. If the other person didn’t or couldn’t have attended those votes we leave those out of the comparison. Because that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it?
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing investment in renewable energy” which either David Fawcett or Michael Danby could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of David Fawcett and Michael Danby on this policy. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".
| Division | David Fawcett | Michael Danby | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|---|
25th Jun 2012, 8:28 PM – Senate Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012 - Third Reading - Read a third time |
No | - | Yes |
25th Jun 2012, 8:24 PM – Senate Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time |
No | - | Yes |
30th May 2012, 7:18 PM – Representatives Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time |
- | absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing investment in renewable energy” which either David Fawcett or Michael Danby could have attended. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".