We can't say anything concrete about how Mathias Cormann voted on stopping former ministers from taking lobbying positions within five years
How Mathias Cormann voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should tighten the ministerial code of conduct to stop former ministers from taking up lobbying positions - including in-house positions - within five years of leaving Parliament
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for stopping former ministers from taking lobbying positions within five years” which Mathias Cormann could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Mathias Cormann on this policy.
| Division | Mathias Cormann | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for stopping former ministers from taking lobbying positions within five years” which Mathias Cormann could have attended.
| Division | Mathias Cormann | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
22nd Jul 2019, 3:55 PM – Senate Committees - Finance and Public Administration References Committee - Reference |
No | Yes |
19th Sep 2018, 3:58 PM – Senate Motions - Lobbying to Political Parties - Change definition of "lobbyist" |
absent | Yes |
19th Sep 2018, 3:54 PM – Senate Motions - Lobbying to Political Parties - Change definition of "lobbyist" |
absent | Yes |
18th Sep 2018, 4:58 PM – Senate Motions - Ministerial Conduct - Tighten |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Mathias Cormann 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.