We can't say anything concrete about how Glenn Sterle voted on political intervention in research funding grants
How Glenn Sterle voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should be able to intervene in the research grant process with the Australian Research Council (ARC) by, for example, vetoing certain grant application where considered appropriate
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for political intervention in research funding grants” which Glenn Sterle could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Glenn Sterle on this policy.
| Division | Glenn Sterle | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for political intervention in research funding grants” which Glenn Sterle could have attended.
| Division | Glenn Sterle | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
18th Mar 2024, 2:57 PM – Senate Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023 - in Committee - Removing international relations veto |
absent | No |
18th Mar 2024, 2:34 PM – Senate Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023 - in Committee - Designated research programs |
absent | Yes |
18th Mar 2024, 2:30 PM – Senate Australian Research Council Amendment (Review Response) Bill 2023 - in Committee - Designated research programs |
absent | No |
4th Dec 2018, 4:37 PM – Senate Motions - Australian Research Council - Remove National Interest Test |
Yes | No |
13th Nov 2018, 3:52 PM – Senate Documents - Australian Research Council - Order for the Production of Documents |
absent | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Glenn Sterle 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.