How Arthur Sinodinos voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should respect its citizens' right to privacy and make sure all sensitive information it does have access to (such as medical, census or tax data) is kept secure

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting citizens' privacy” which Arthur Sinodinos could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Arthur Sinodinos on this policy.

Division Arthur Sinodinos Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting citizens' privacy” which Arthur Sinodinos could have attended.

Division Arthur Sinodinos Supporters vote

12th Nov 2018, 3:56 PM – Senate Motions - My Health Record - Extend opt-out period

absent Yes

20th Sep 2018, 12:27 PM – Senate Motions - Right to Privacy - Protect

absent Yes

15th Aug 2018, 4:06 PM – Senate Motions - Digital Encryption - Warrant and privacy

absent Yes

29th Nov 2017, 4:10 PM – Senate Documents - Department of Human Services - Order for the Production of Documents

absent Yes

18th Jun 2013, 4:07 PM – Senate Motions - PRISM - Australia's vulnerability

No Yes

27th Feb 2013, 4:11 PM – Senate Motions - National Security Inquiry - Abandon plan to retain data for up to two years

absent Yes

How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out

Arthur Sinodinos 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.