How Nick Sherry voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should implement the international conventions that relate to seeking refuge and protection from torture. These include the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and the non-refoulement provisions of the UN Convention Against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for implementing refugee and protection conventions” which Nick Sherry could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Nick Sherry on this policy.

Division Nick Sherry Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for implementing refugee and protection conventions” which Nick Sherry could have attended.

Division Nick Sherry Supporters vote

11th Oct 2011 – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - International refugee obligations

absent Yes

17th Jun 2010, 9:47 AM – Senate Motions - World Refugee Day - Concerns about policies

absent Yes

12th May 2010, 3:52 PM – Senate Motions - Suspension of processing Sri Lankan and Afghan asylum claims

absent Yes

3rd Feb 2010, 3:49 PM – Senate Motions - Tamil Asylum Seekers - End standoff

absent Yes

27th Oct 2009, 3:50 PM – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - Language and law

absent Yes

26th Feb 2007, 5:03 PM – Senate Matters of Urgency - Asylum Seekers - Non-refoulment

Yes Yes

20th Jun 2006, 4:05 PM – Senate Motions - World Refugee Day - Refugee Convention

absent Yes

How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out

Nick Sherry 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.