We can't say anything concrete about how Concetta Fierravanti-Wells voted on increasing eligibility requirements for Australian citizenship
How Concetta Fierravanti-Wells voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should take a restrictive approach to granting Australian citizenship by introducing more eligibility requirements, such as applicants needing greater English language proficiency and needing to spend more time living in Australia before they can submit their applications
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing eligibility requirements for Australian citizenship” which Concetta Fierravanti-Wells could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Concetta Fierravanti-Wells on this policy.
| Division | Concetta Fierravanti-Wells | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing eligibility requirements for Australian citizenship” which Concetta Fierravanti-Wells could have attended.
| Division | Concetta Fierravanti-Wells | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
12th Nov 2020, 12:13 PM – Senate Motions - Australian Languages - Role of English in Australia |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Concetta Fierravanti-Wells 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.