We can't say anything concrete about how Robert Oakeshott voted on compensating victims of overseas terrorism since the September 11 attack
How Robert Oakeshott voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should extend compensation to all Australian victims of overseas terrorism since the 11 September 2001 attack, or to their next of kin
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for compensating victims of overseas terrorism since the September 11 attack” which Robert Oakeshott could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Robert Oakeshott on this policy.
| Division | Robert Oakeshott | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
21st Jun 2012, 2:42 PM – Representatives Social Security Amendment (Supporting Australian Victims of Terrorism Overseas) Bill 2011 - Consideration in Detail - Compensate past victims |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for compensating victims of overseas terrorism since the September 11 attack” which Robert Oakeshott could have attended.
| Division | Robert Oakeshott | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
29th Nov 2012, 6:29 PM – Representatives Private Members' Business - Victims of Terrorism - Compensate victims since 10 September 2001 |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Robert Oakeshott 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.