We can't say anything concrete about how Peter Georgiou voted on investing in climate science
How Peter Georgiou voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should invest in climate science to ensure that Australia is best equipped to deal with the challenges of climate change
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for investing in climate science” which Peter Georgiou could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Peter Georgiou on this policy.
| Division | Peter Georgiou | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for investing in climate science” which Peter Georgiou could have attended.
| Division | Peter Georgiou | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
14th Sep 2017, 11:48 AM – Senate Motions - Climate Science - Commends and notes research |
absent | Yes |
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 Peter Georgiou was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.