We can't say anything concrete about how Catryna Bilyk voted on increasing protections for franchisees
How Catryna Bilyk voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should amend current laws in order to address the current power disparity between franchisor and franchisee
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing protections for franchisees” 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 |
|---|---|---|
22nd Feb 2021, 12:49 PM – Senate Franchising Laws Amendment (Fairness in Franchising) Bill 2020 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
absent | Yes |
22nd Feb 2021, 12:41 PM – Senate Franchising Laws Amendment (Fairness in Franchising) Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing protections for franchisees” which Catryna Bilyk could have attended.
| Division | Catryna Bilyk | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
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 Catryna Bilyk was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.