We can't say anything concrete about how Bridget McKenzie voted on increasing eligibility requirements for Australian citizenship
How Bridget McKenzie voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should take a restrictive approach to granting Australian citizenship by introducing more eligibility requirements, such as applicants needing greater English language proficiency and needing to spend more time living in Australia before they can submit their applications
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing eligibility requirements for Australian citizenship” which Bridget McKenzie could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Bridget McKenzie on this policy.
| Division | Bridget McKenzie | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing eligibility requirements for Australian citizenship” which Bridget McKenzie could have attended.
| Division | Bridget McKenzie | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
12th Nov 2020, 12:13 PM – Senate Motions - Australian Languages - Role of English in Australia |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Bridget McKenzie has only voted once on this policy and it wasn't on a "strong" vote. So it's not possible to draw a clear conclusion about their position.
This could be because there were simply not many relevant divisions (formal votes) during the time they've been in parliament (most votes happen on "the voices", so we simply have no decent record) or they were absent for votes that could have contributed to their voting record.