Compare how Slade Brockman and David Smith voted on decreasing availability of welfare payments

Now this is where it gets a bit tricky… Two people might vote the same way on votes they both attended, so their votes are 100% in agreement. They might also have voted in a way we’d describe differently when looking at all of one person's votes. If the other person didn’t or couldn’t have attended those votes we leave those out of the comparison. Because that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it?

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for decreasing availability of welfare payments” which either Slade Brockman or David Smith could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Slade Brockman and David Smith on this policy. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".

Division Slade Brockman David Smith Supporters vote

10th Dec 2020, 5:48 PM – Senate Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Extension of Coronavirus Support) Bill 2020 - in Committee - Don't cut the supplement

No - No

29th Oct 2020, 1:29 PM – Representatives Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Coronavirus and Other Measures) Bill 2020 - Consideration in Detail - Don't increase and extend support

- absent Yes

2nd Dec 2019, 7:11 PM – Representatives Social Services Legislation Amendment (Payment Integrity) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

- No Yes

3rd Dec 2018, 9:00 PM – Senate Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Promoting Sustainable Welfare) Bill 2018 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Yes Yes Yes

3rd Dec 2018, 8:20 PM – Senate Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Promoting Sustainable Welfare) Bill 2018 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

absent Yes Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for decreasing availability of welfare payments” which either Slade Brockman or David Smith could have attended. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".

Division Slade Brockman David Smith Supporters vote

2nd Aug 2023, 10:23 AM – Senate Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Strengthening the Safety Net) Bill 2023 - in Committee - Raise income support

absent - No

1st Aug 2023, 1:28 PM – Senate Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Strengthening the Safety Net) Bill 2023 - in Committee - Eligibility and commencement

absent - No

18th Mar 2021, 2:54 PM – Senate Social Services Legislation Amendment (Strengthening Income Support) Bill 2021 - Second Reading - Unemployment pay

absent - No

2nd Dec 2020, 5:28 PM – Representatives Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Extension of Coronavirus Support) Bill 2020 - Consideration in Detail - Not extending beneficial changes

- No Yes

2nd Dec 2020, 5:10 PM – Representatives Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Extension of Coronavirus Support) Bill 2020 - Consideration in Detail - Liquid assets waiting period

- No Yes

2nd Dec 2020, 4:51 PM – Representatives Social Services and Other Legislation Amendment (Extension of Coronavirus Support) Bill 2020 - Consideration in Detail - Discontinue support

- No Yes

2nd Sep 2020, 4:01 PM – Senate Motions - Jobseeker Payment - Increase income support

No - No

27th Feb 2020, 12:26 PM – Senate Motions - Child Care - Parents undertaking study

absent - No

25th Feb 2020, 5:25 PM – Representatives Paid Parental Leave Amendment (Flexibility Measures) Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Criticism of welfare cuts

- Yes No

2nd Dec 2019, 7:05 PM – Representatives Social Services Legislation Amendment (Payment Integrity) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Disagree with bill

- Yes No

12th Nov 2018, 4:54 PM – Senate Motions - Anti-Poverty Week - Against punitive approach to social policy

absent Yes No