How Christopher Back voted compared to someone who agrees that the Federal Government should respond to reports about high levels of child sexual abuse in some Indigenous communities in the Northern Territory by introducing the Northern Territory National Emergency Response or the very similar Stronger Futures Policy, also referred to as "the intervention"

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for the Intervention in the Northern Territory” which Christopher Back could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Christopher Back on this policy.

Division Christopher Back Supporters vote

28th Jun 2012, 2:13 AM – Senate Stronger Futures in the Northern Territory (Consequential and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2011 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

absent Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for the Intervention in the Northern Territory” which Christopher Back could have attended.

Division Christopher Back Supporters vote

28th Jun 2012, 11:07 PM – Senate Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 - Leave schedule 1 as it is

absent Yes

28th Jun 2012, 12:57 AM – Senate Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 - Agree to Australian Greens amendments reducing sunset clause periods

absent No

28th Jun 2012, 12:01 AM – Senate Social Security and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 - Leave schedule 2 as it is

absent Yes

21st Jun 2011 – Senate Motions - Northern Territory Emergency Response - Repeal

absent No

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 Christopher Back was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.