We can't say anything concrete about how Rebekha Sharkie voted on political intervention in research funding grants
How Rebekha Sharkie voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should be able to intervene in the research grant process with the Australian Research Council (ARC) by, for example, vetoing certain grant application where considered appropriate
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for political intervention in research funding grants” which Rebekha Sharkie could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Rebekha Sharkie on this policy.
| Division | Rebekha Sharkie | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for political intervention in research funding grants” which Rebekha Sharkie could have attended.
| Division | Rebekha Sharkie | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
26th Nov 2019, 5:12 PM – Representatives Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2019 - Consideration in Detail - Anouncement process |
absent | No |
26th Nov 2019, 4:51 PM – Representatives Australian Research Council Amendment Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Research cuts |
No | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Rebekha Sharkie 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.