How Don Farrell voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should decrease the subsidisation of taxpayer money into fossil fuels

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for decreasing subsidisation of fossil fuels” which Don Farrell could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Don Farrell on this policy.

Division Don Farrell Supporters vote

3rd Aug 2021, 5:51 PM – Senate Regulations and Determinations - Industry Research and Development - Disallow two instruments

absent Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for decreasing subsidisation of fossil fuels” which Don Farrell could have attended.

Division Don Farrell Supporters vote

19th Aug 2024, 5:01 PM – Senate Matters of Urgency - Gas Industry: Middle Arm - Withdraw subsidy

absent Yes

14th Nov 2023, 12:36 PM – Senate Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Australia's Engagement in the Pacific) Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Fossil fuels

absent Yes

30th Mar 2023, 1:21 PM – Senate Safeguard Mechanism (Crediting) Amendment Bill 2023 - in Committee - Fossil fuel programs

absent Yes

15th Dec 2022, 4:10 PM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (Energy Price Relief Plan) Bill 2022 - Second Reading - Fossil fuel subsidies

absent Yes

26th Sep 2022, 11:23 AM – Senate Offshore Petroleum and Greenhouse Gas Storage Amendment (Benefit to Australia) Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Cth royality, subsidies, and costs

No Yes

16th Jun 2021, 3:53 PM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - G7 resolutions

absent Yes

13th May 2021, 12:30 PM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - Stop funding fossil fuels

absent Yes

2nd Dec 2019, 4:17 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Withdraw support for Adani

absent Yes

How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out

Don Farrell 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.