We can't say anything concrete about how Bridget McKenzie voted on ending Governor-General allowances for serious misconduct
How Bridget McKenzie voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should cease paying allowances to former Governor-Generals if they are found to have engaged in serious misconduct
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for ending Governor-General allowances for serious misconduct” which Bridget McKenzie could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Bridget McKenzie on this policy.
| Division | Bridget McKenzie | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
3rd Apr 2019, 8:51 PM – Senate Governor-General Amendment (Salary) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Serious misconduct |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for ending Governor-General allowances for serious misconduct” which Bridget McKenzie could have attended.
| Division | Bridget McKenzie | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
3rd Apr 2019, 8:55 PM – Senate Governor-General Amendment (Salary) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - No allowances where serious misconduct |
absent | Yes |
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 Bridget McKenzie was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.