We can't say anything concrete about how Lucy Gichuhi voted on increasing restrictions on gambling
How Lucy Gichuhi 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 Lucy Gichuhi could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Lucy Gichuhi on this policy.
| Division | Lucy Gichuhi | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
27th Mar 2018, 12:06 PM – Senate Communications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Gambling ads |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing restrictions on gambling” which Lucy Gichuhi could have attended.
| Division | Lucy Gichuhi | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
13th Feb 2019, 4:20 PM – Senate Motions - Gambling - Introduced restrictions |
No | Yes |
26th Mar 2018, 8:51 PM – Senate Communications Legislation Amendment (Online Content Services and Other Measures) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Prohibit betting on lottery outcome |
absent | Yes |
14th Feb 2018, 4:15 PM – Senate Motions - Gambling - Phase out poker machines |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Lucy Gichuhi 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.