We can't say anything concrete about how George Brandis voted on criminalising "revenge porn"
How George Brandis voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should make it a criminal offence to share intimate images without consent (known colloquially as "revenge porn") and not just leave it up to the state-level governments to criminalise it separately in each State and Territory
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for criminalising "revenge porn"” which George Brandis could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of George Brandis on this policy.
Division | George Brandis | Supporters vote |
---|---|---|
14th Feb 2018, 11:54 AM – Senate Enhancing Online Safety (Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Criminal offences |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for criminalising "revenge porn"” which George Brandis could have attended.
Division | George Brandis | Supporters vote |
---|---|---|
13th Feb 2018, 7:11 PM – Senate Enhancing Online Safety (Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Criminalise |
absent | Yes |
19th Jun 2017, 1:52 PM – Senate Enhancing Online Safety for Children Amendment Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Criminalise "revenge porn" |
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 George Brandis was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.