We can't say anything concrete about how Gary Humphries voted on protecting whistleblowers
How Gary Humphries voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should introduce legislation to protect people who disclose information for the benefit of the public interest and protect the journalists who report it
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Gary Humphries could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Gary Humphries on this policy.
| Division | Gary Humphries | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Gary Humphries could have attended.
| Division | Gary Humphries | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
19th Mar 2013, 3:47 PM – Senate Motions - Public Interest Disclosure - Protect whistle blowers |
absent | Yes |
8th Feb 2007, 10:37 AM – Senate Motions - Government Accountability and Transparency - Canadian bill |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Gary Humphries 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.