We can't say anything concrete about how Michaelia Cash voted on storing all citizens' telecommunications data for access by government agencies
How Michaelia Cash voted compared to someone who agrees that telecommunications providers should be required to store all their customers' usages data for later access by agencies with the Attorney General's consent
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for storing all citizens' telecommunications data for access by government agencies” which Michaelia Cash could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Michaelia Cash on this policy.
| Division | Michaelia Cash | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
26th Mar 2015 – Senate Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2015 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
absent | Yes |
24th Mar 2015, 8:46 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment (Data Retention) Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for storing all citizens' telecommunications data for access by government agencies” which Michaelia Cash could have attended.
| Division | Michaelia Cash | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
16th Mar 2016 – Senate Motions - Mandatory Telecommunications Data Retention Scheme - Repeal the scheme |
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 Michaelia Cash was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.