We can't say anything concrete about how Amanda Stoker voted on changing the wording of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act
How Amanda Stoker voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should change section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act so that the words "insult", "offend", "humiliate" are replaced with the word "harass"
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for changing the wording of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act” which Amanda Stoker could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Amanda Stoker on this policy.
| Division | Amanda Stoker | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for changing the wording of section 18C of the Racial Discrimination Act” which Amanda Stoker could have attended.
| Division | Amanda Stoker | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
21st Mar 2018, 4:20 PM – Senate Motions - International Day for the Elimination of Racial Discrimination - Condemn Turnbull Government |
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 Amanda Stoker was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.