We can't say anything concrete about how Mathias Cormann voted on increasing parliamentary entitlements for current MPs and Senators
How Mathias Cormann voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal governmnet should increase parliamentary entitlements for current MPs and Senators, such as legitimate expenditure, salary packages, superannuation entitlements and/or other allowances like the printing allowance
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing parliamentary entitlements for current MPs and Senators” 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 | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing parliamentary entitlements for current MPs and Senators” which Mathias Cormann could have attended.
| Division | Mathias Cormann | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
3rd Apr 2019, 9:34 PM – Senate Regulations and Determinations - Parliamentary Business Resources Amendment (2019 Measures No. 1) Regulations 2019 - Disallowance |
absent | No |
21st Mar 2017, 4:08 PM – Senate Motions - Parliamentarians' Entitlements - Do not increase remuneration until in surplus |
absent | No |
14th May 2009, 10:34 AM – Senate Motions - Remuneration Tribunal Determination - Electorate allowance |
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 Mathias Cormann was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.