We can't say anything concrete about how Steve Martin voted on protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats
How Steve Martin voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should protect threatened forest and bushland habitats from logging.
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Steve Martin could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Steve Martin on this policy.
| Division | Steve Martin | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Steve Martin could have attended.
| Division | Steve Martin | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
6th Dec 2018, 12:42 PM – Senate Motions - Halls Island - Make full assessment on World Heritage values |
absent | Yes |
4th Dec 2018, 4:50 PM – Senate Motions - United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity - Heed recommendations |
absent | Yes |
14th Feb 2018, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Tasmania: Environment - Tarkine |
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 Steve Martin was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.