We can't say anything concrete about how Mathias Cormann voted on criminalising "revenge porn"
How Mathias Cormann voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should make it a criminal offence to share intimate images without consent (known colloquially as "revenge porn") and not just leave it up to the state-level governments to criminalise it separately in each State and Territory
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for criminalising "revenge porn"” which Mathias Cormann could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Mathias Cormann on this policy.
| Division | Mathias Cormann | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
14th Feb 2018, 11:54 AM – Senate Enhancing Online Safety (Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill 2017 - in Committee - Criminal offences |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for criminalising "revenge porn"” which Mathias Cormann could have attended.
| Division | Mathias Cormann | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
13th Feb 2018, 7:11 PM – Senate Enhancing Online Safety (Non-Consensual Sharing of Intimate Images) Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Criminalise |
absent | Yes |
19th Jun 2017, 1:52 PM – Senate Enhancing Online Safety for Children Amendment Bill 2017 - Second Reading - Criminalise "revenge porn" |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Mathias Cormann 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.