We can't say anything concrete about how Dave Sharma voted on protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats
How Dave Sharma voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should protect threatened forest and bushland habitats from logging.
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Dave Sharma could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Dave Sharma on this policy.
| Division | Dave Sharma | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
11th Sep 2024, 10:07 AM – Senate Ending Native Forest Logging Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Dave Sharma could have attended.
| Division | Dave Sharma | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
9th Sep 2024, 12:12 PM – Senate Illegal Logging Prohibition Amendment (Strengthening Measures to Prevent Illegal Timber Trade) Bill 2024 - Second Reading - Native forests |
absent | Yes |
9th Sep 2024, 12:04 PM – Senate Illegal Logging Prohibition Amendment (Strengthening Measures to Prevent Illegal Timber Trade) Bill 2024 - Second Reading - Ending Native Forest Logging Bill 2023 |
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 Dave Sharma was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.