We can't say anything concrete about how Mathias Cormann voted on increasing legal protections for LGBTI people
How Mathias Cormann voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase legal protections for people who identify as LGBTI (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender and Intersex) by, for example, getting rid of all current exemptions that permit discrimination against LGBTI people by religious insitutions (such as schools)
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing legal protections for LGBTI people” 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 increasing legal protections for LGBTI people” which Mathias Cormann could have attended.
| Division | Mathias Cormann | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
14th Nov 2019, 12:37 PM – Senate Motions - Intersex Day of Solidarity - Darlington Statement |
No | Yes |
3rd Dec 2018, 4:33 PM – Senate Motions - Gender and Sexual Orientation - Healthcare and gender diverse treatment |
absent | Yes |
16th Oct 2018, 4:15 PM – Senate Motions - Anti-Discrimination Laws - Protect students and staff at independent schools |
absent | Yes |
16th Oct 2018, 3:50 PM – Senate Motions - Religious Freedom Review - Discrimination against LGBTI students and staff |
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.