We can't say anything concrete about how Bridget McKenzie voted on increasing funding for public good research
How Bridget McKenzie voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should invest more in research for the public good in the tertiary sector, including by supporting the PhD candidates undertaking it
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing funding for public good research” 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 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing funding for public good research” which Bridget McKenzie could have attended.
| Division | Bridget McKenzie | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
6th Mar 2023, 6:22 PM – Senate Higher Education Support Amendment (Australia's Economic Accelerator) Bill 2022 - Second Reading - Support pure research |
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.