We can't say anything concrete about how Bob Carr voted on increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management
How Bob Carr voted compared to someone who agrees that there should be more independent access to detention centres and more information provided about the management of asylum seekers under Australian government policy, including the interception of boats at sea
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management” which Bob Carr could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Bob Carr on this policy.
| Division | Bob Carr | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
16th May 2013, 11:28 AM – Senate Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Media access |
absent | Yes |
16th May 2013, 11:06 AM – Senate Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - In Committee - AHRC access |
absent | Yes |
16th Aug 2012, 9:09 PM – Senate Migration Legislation Amendment (Regional Processing and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Independent annual review |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management” which Bob Carr could have attended.
| Division | Bob Carr | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
7th Feb 2013, 12:18 PM – Senate Motions - Immigration Detention Facilities - Media access |
absent | Yes |
12th Sep 2012, 11:45 AM – Senate Motions - Republic of Nauru - 12 month limit on detention |
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 Bob Carr was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.