We can't say anything concrete about how Catryna Bilyk voted on extending Jobkeeper Payment
How Catryna Bilyk voted compared to someone who agrees that The JobKeeper payment, which is part of the federal government's response to the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, should be extended for industries that are still being adversely affected by the pandemic, such as the tourism industry
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for extending Jobkeeper Payment” which Catryna Bilyk could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Catryna Bilyk on this policy.
| Division | Catryna Bilyk | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for extending Jobkeeper Payment” which Catryna Bilyk could have attended.
| Division | Catryna Bilyk | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
23rd Feb 2021, 4:57 PM – Senate Motions - Jobkeeper Payment - Arts and Entertainment Industry |
absent | Yes |
18th Feb 2021, 12:31 PM – Senate Motions - Jobseeker Payment - Extend for tourism industry |
absent | Yes |
13th May 2020, 4:29 PM – Senate Motions - Jobkeeper Payment - Extend |
Yes | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Catryna Bilyk 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.