We can't say anything concrete about how Lisa Chesters voted on increasing funding for vocational education
How Lisa Chesters voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase funding for the vocational education sector, which includes TAFEs, apprenticeships and traineeships
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing funding for vocational education” which Lisa Chesters could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Lisa Chesters on this policy.
Division | Lisa Chesters | Supporters vote | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
no votes listed |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing funding for vocational education” which Lisa Chesters could have attended.
Division | Lisa Chesters | Supporters vote |
---|---|---|
10th Jun 2020, 7:12 PM – Representatives National Skills Commissioner Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Keep second reading motion unchanged |
absent | No |
10th Feb 2020, 7:10 PM – Representatives Student Identifiers Amendment (Enhanced Student Permissions) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Support vocational education |
absent | Yes |
10th Feb 2020, 5:46 PM – Representatives Trade Support Loans Amendment (Improving Administration) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Support vocational education |
absent | Yes |
24th Oct 2019 – Representatives Education Legislation Amendment (Tuition Protection and Other Measures) Bill 2019 and two others - Second Reading - State of TAFE and universities |
Yes | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Lisa Chesters 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.