We can't say anything concrete about how Penny Wong voted on drug testing welfare recipients
How Penny Wong voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should introduce mandatory drug testing for people who receive certain welfare payments
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for drug testing welfare recipients” which Penny Wong could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Penny Wong on this policy.
| Division | Penny Wong | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
21st Mar 2018, 11:14 AM – Senate Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Agree with bill |
absent | Yes |
7th Dec 2017, 5:59 PM – Senate Social Services Legislation Amendment (Welfare Reform) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for drug testing welfare recipients” which Penny Wong could have attended.
| Division | Penny Wong | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
14th Jun 2017, 4:09 PM – Senate Motions - Budget - Abandon drug testing income support |
absent | No |
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 Penny Wong was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.