We can't say anything concrete about how Rebekha Sharkie voted on increasing restrictions on gambling
How Rebekha Sharkie voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase restrictions on the gambling industry in order to address the issue of problem gambling
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing restrictions on gambling” 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 increasing restrictions on gambling” which Rebekha Sharkie could have attended.
| Division | Rebekha Sharkie | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
8th Feb 2017, 5:11 PM – Representatives Interactive Gambling Amendment Bill 2016 - Second Reading - Phase out ads relating to betting or gambling |
Yes | Yes |
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.