We can't say anything concrete about how Kim Beazley voted on increasing Aboriginal land rights
How Kim Beazley voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander land rights by, for example, increasing their legal recognition and protection
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing Aboriginal land rights” which Kim Beazley could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Kim Beazley on this policy.
| Division | Kim Beazley | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing Aboriginal land rights” which Kim Beazley could have attended.
| Division | Kim Beazley | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
17th Aug 2006, 1:52 PM – Representatives Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2006 - Consideration of Senate Message - Intertidal claims |
Yes | Yes |
19th Jun 2006, 8:50 PM – Representatives Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2006 - Second Reading - Read a second time |
absent | No |
19th Jun 2006, 8:39 PM – Representatives Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Amendment Bill 2006 - Second Reading - Keep the words unchanged |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Kim Beazley 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.