We can't say anything concrete about how Sam McMahon voted on decreasing the gender pay gap
How Sam McMahon 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 Sam McMahon could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Sam McMahon on this policy.
| Division | Sam McMahon | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for decreasing the gender pay gap” which Sam McMahon could have attended.
| Division | Sam McMahon | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
23rd Jun 2021, 4:14 PM – Senate Motions - Discrimination - Against affirmative action |
absent | No |
8th Dec 2020, 4:53 PM – Senate Motions - Women's Economic Security - Retirement incomes |
No | Yes |
26th Aug 2020, 4:02 PM – Senate Motions - Superannuation - Inequality |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Sam McMahon 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.