We can't say anything concrete about how John Hogg voted on protecting whistleblowers
How John Hogg 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 John Hogg could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of John Hogg on this policy.
| Division | John Hogg | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting whistleblowers” which John Hogg could have attended.
| Division | John Hogg | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
19th Mar 2013, 3:47 PM – Senate Motions - Public Interest Disclosure - Protect whistle blowers |
absent | Yes |
8th Feb 2007, 10:37 AM – Senate Motions - Government Accountability and Transparency - Canadian bill |
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 John Hogg was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.