We can't say anything concrete about how Anthony Chisholm voted on the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA)
How Anthony Chisholm voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should fund and maintain the Australian Renewable Energy Agency, or ARENA, as an independent body that manages the government's renewable energy programs
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA)” which Anthony Chisholm could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Anthony Chisholm on this policy.
| Division | Anthony Chisholm | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
15th Sep 2016, 11:35 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
absent | No |
15th Sep 2016, 10:27 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - in Committee - ARENA |
absent | No |
15th Sep 2016, 9:25 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Second Reading - Agree to the main idea |
absent | No |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA)” which Anthony Chisholm could have attended.
| Division | Anthony Chisholm | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
15th Sep 2016, 9:21 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Second Reading - Financial arrangements of ARENA |
absent | Yes |
15th Sep 2016, 9:12 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Second Reading - ARENA funding |
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 Anthony Chisholm was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.