We can't say anything concrete about how Craig Kelly voted on considering legislation to create a federal anti-corruption commission (procedural)
How Craig Kelly voted compared to someone who agrees that the parliament should immediately introduce and debate legislation to create a federal anti-corruption commission, or national integrity commission, that would detect, investigate and prevent corruption at a federal level (NB: this policy is related to our other policy, called "For creating a federal Anti-Corruption Commission")
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for considering legislation to create a federal anti-corruption commission (procedural)” which Craig Kelly could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Craig Kelly on this policy.
| Division | Craig Kelly | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for considering legislation to create a federal anti-corruption commission (procedural)” which Craig Kelly could have attended.
| Division | Craig Kelly | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
25th Nov 2021, 11:37 AM – Representatives Business - Rearrangement - Let a vote on the integrity commission take place |
absent | Yes |
20th Oct 2021, 5:36 PM – Representatives Motions - Commonwealth Integrity Commission - Don't let a vote happen |
absent | No |
11th Jun 2020, 9:46 AM – Representatives Business - Consideration of Legislation - Don't let a vote happen |
absent | No |
10th Sep 2019, 6:16 PM – Representatives National Integrity Commission Bill 2018 (No. 2) - First Reading - Consider second reading tomorrow |
Yes | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Craig Kelly 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.