How Sam Dastyari 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 Sam Dastyari could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Sam Dastyari on this policy.

Division Sam Dastyari Supporters vote

14th May 2015, 3:43 PM – Senate Australian Border Force Bill 2015 and related bill - Third Reading - Pass the bill

absent No

25th Sep 2014 – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014 - in Committee - Against increase in penalty for unauthorised disclosure

absent Yes

25th Sep 2014 – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014 - in Committee - Remove secrecy provisions

absent Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which Sam Dastyari could have attended.

Division Sam Dastyari Supporters vote

14th May 2015, 1:58 PM – Senate Australian Border Force Bill 2015 and related bill - in Committee - Public interest amendment

No Yes

25th Sep 2014, 9:31 PM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2014 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

absent No

How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out

Sam Dastyari 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.