We can't say anything concrete about how John Faulkner voted on decreasing the gender pay gap
How John Faulkner voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should introduce legislation that reduces the gap in income between women and men and ensures both sexes are paid equally well
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for decreasing the gender pay gap” 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 |
|---|---|---|
22nd Nov 2012, 8:30 PM – Senate Equal Opportunity for Women in the Workplace Amendment Bill 2012 - 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 decreasing the gender pay gap” which John Faulkner could have attended.
| Division | John Faulkner | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
19th Jun 2013, 3:43 PM – Senate Motions - Health - Inquiry into unpaid care |
absent | Yes |
23rd Aug 2012, 12:08 PM – Senate Motions - Inequality - Introduce a Federal Equality Act |
absent | Yes |
7th Feb 2007, 3:49 PM – Senate Motions - Commission on the Status of Women - End discrimination and gender-based violence |
Yes | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
John Faulkner 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.