We can't say anything concrete about how Sharon Claydon voted on considering motions on Gaza (2023-24) (procedural)
How Sharon Claydon voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should suspend the usual procedural rules - known as standing orders - that would otherwise prevent our representatives from considering and voting on motions related to the humanitarian disaster in Gaza that began in October 2023 and which is now the subject of an ongoing case in the International Court of Justice (ICJ), in which South Africa is accusing Israel of genocide
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for considering motions on Gaza (2023-24) (procedural)” which Sharon Claydon could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Sharon Claydon on this policy.
| Division | Sharon Claydon | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for considering motions on Gaza (2023-24) (procedural)” which Sharon Claydon could have attended.
| Division | Sharon Claydon | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
18th Mar 2024, 12:36 PM – Representatives Motions - Middle East - Let another vote take place |
absent | Yes |
26th Feb 2024, 12:30 PM – Representatives Motions - Middle East: Occupied Palestinian Territories - Let another vote take place |
absent | Yes |
7th Feb 2024, 10:56 AM – Representatives Motions - Middle East - Let another vote take place |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" 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 Sharon Claydon was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.