We can't say anything concrete about how James Paterson voted on restricting foreign ownership
How James Paterson voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should restrict foreign ownership within Australia, particularly where foreign ownership would be against the national interest
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for restricting foreign ownership” which James Paterson could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of James Paterson on this policy.
| Division | James Paterson | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for restricting foreign ownership” which James Paterson could have attended.
| Division | James Paterson | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
4th May 2016, 4:06 PM – Senate Motions - Sugar Industry - Act on Committee recommendations |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
James Paterson 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.