We can't say anything concrete about how Natasha Stott Despoja voted on increasing freedom of political communication
How Natasha Stott Despoja voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase freedom of political communication in Australia by, for example, protecting people's right to inform others about issues and events in the public interest
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing freedom of political communication” which Natasha Stott Despoja could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Natasha Stott Despoja on this policy.
| Division | Natasha Stott Despoja | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
13th Sep 2007, 12:39 PM – Senate Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Democratic Plebiscites) Bill 2007 - Second Reading - International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing freedom of political communication” which Natasha Stott Despoja could have attended.
| Division | Natasha Stott Despoja | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
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 Natasha Stott Despoja was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.