We can't say anything concrete about how Andrew Bragg voted on a constitutionally enshrined First Nations Voice in parliament
How Andrew Bragg voted compared to someone who agrees that the Constitution should be amended to include a requirement for an Indigenous Voice to federal parliament, such as that envisaged by the Uluru Statement from the Heart
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for a constitutionally enshrined First Nations Voice in parliament” which Andrew Bragg could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Andrew Bragg on this policy.
| Division | Andrew Bragg | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for a constitutionally enshrined First Nations Voice in parliament” which Andrew Bragg could have attended.
| Division | Andrew Bragg | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
11th Sep 2019, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Message Sticks Carried by Alwyn Doolan - Accept |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Andrew Bragg 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.