How Jason Wood voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should maintain or increase funding for the legal assistance sector (Legal Aid, community legal centres, etc.)

Division Jason Wood Supporters vote Division outcome

11th Sep 2018 – Representatives Family Law Amendment (Family Violence and Cross-Examination of Parties) Bill 2018 - Second Reading - Access to legal representation

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion that would have amended the usual second reading motion "that the bill be read a second time" (in other words, "that the MPs agree with the main idea of the bill"), which means it failed. The motion was introduced by Labor MP Mark Dreyfus.

Motion text

That all words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House calls on the Government to provide adequate funding for Legal Aid to ensure sufficient access to legal representation in order to facilitate a ban on direct cross-examination of family violence survivors in court."

absent Yes Not passed by a small majority

How "never voted" is worked out

Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case Jason Wood was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other than that they have "never voted" on this policy.