We can't say anything concrete about how Maria Kovacic voted on protecting whistleblowers
How Maria Kovacic voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should introduce legislation to protect people who disclose information for the benefit of the public interest and protect the journalists who report it
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Maria Kovacic could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Maria Kovacic on this policy.
| Division | Maria Kovacic | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
15th Jun 2023, 10:35 AM – Senate Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022 - in Committee - Meaning of public interest disclosure |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Maria Kovacic could have attended.
| Division | Maria Kovacic | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
16th May 2024, 7:26 PM – Senate Public Service Amendment Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Whistleblower protections |
absent | Yes |
15th Jun 2023, 11:04 AM – Senate Public Interest Disclosure Amendment (Review) Bill 2022 - in Committee - Parliamentary staff |
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 Maria Kovacic was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.