We can't say anything concrete about how Steve Fielding voted on increasing protection of Aboriginal heritage sites
How Steve Fielding voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase the protection of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage sites
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing protection of Aboriginal heritage sites” which Steve Fielding could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Steve Fielding on this policy.
| Division | Steve Fielding | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing protection of Aboriginal heritage sites” which Steve Fielding could have attended.
| Division | Steve Fielding | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
16th Aug 2006, 3:57 PM – Senate Motions - Burrup Peninsula Rock Art - Protect rock art |
absent | Yes |
28th Mar 2006, 5:26 PM – Senate Motions — Tarkine Aboriginal Rock Art — Prevent vandalism |
absent | Yes |
28th Mar 2006, 4:06 PM – Senate Motions - Tarkine Aboriginal Rock Art - Prevent vandalism |
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 Steve Fielding was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.