We can't say anything concrete about how Ian Macfarlane voted on compensating victims of overseas terrorism since the September 11 attack
How Ian Macfarlane voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should extend compensation to all Australian victims of overseas terrorism since the 11 September 2001 attack, or to their next of kin
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for compensating victims of overseas terrorism since the September 11 attack” which Ian Macfarlane could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Ian Macfarlane on this policy.
| Division | Ian Macfarlane | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
21st Jun 2012, 2:42 PM – Representatives Social Security Amendment (Supporting Australian Victims of Terrorism Overseas) Bill 2011 - Consideration in Detail - Compensate past victims |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for compensating victims of overseas terrorism since the September 11 attack” which Ian Macfarlane could have attended.
| Division | Ian Macfarlane | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
29th Nov 2012, 6:29 PM – Representatives Private Members' Business - Victims of Terrorism - Compensate victims since 10 September 2001 |
Yes | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Ian Macfarlane 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.