We can't say anything concrete about how John Faulkner voted on Australia's timber industry
How John Faulkner voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should protect Australia's logging industry and the jobs it represents
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for Australia's timber industry” which John Faulkner could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of John Faulkner on this policy.
| Division | John Faulkner | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for Australia's timber industry” which John Faulkner could have attended.
| Division | John Faulkner | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
25th Jun 2013, 3:59 PM – Senate Motions - Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area - Prohibit logging |
absent | No |
20th Jun 2013, 12:11 PM – Senate Motions - National Parks - Protect |
absent | No |
11th May 2010, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Environment: Millewa Forest - Stop logging |
absent | No |
29th Nov 2006, 3:45 PM – Senate Motions - Logging in Tasmania’s Weld River Valley - Halt logging |
absent | No |
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 John Faulkner was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.