voted compared to someone who believes that
the federal governmnet should increase parliamentary entitlements for current MPs and Senators, such as legitimate expenditure, salary packages, superannuation entitlements and/or other allowances like the printing allowance
The majority voted against a motion that opposed the rise in electorate allowance.
Senator Bob Brown introduced the motion and explained:
This motion is to disallow the regulation by which the members of parliament would get an extra $4,900 a year, or $90 a week, in electorate allowance.
He argued that this was a particularly bad time for an increase to the allowance due to the recession.
That Part 3 (clauses 3.1 to 3.3) of Determination 2009/04: Remuneration and Allowances for Holders of Public Office; and Members of Parliament – Entitlements and Office Holders Additional Salary, made pursuant to subsections 7(1), 7(3) and 7(4) of the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973, be disapproved.
Not passed by a large majority
How "never voted" 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
was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other
than that they have "never voted" on this policy.