We can't say anything concrete about how Kym Richardson voted on ending immigration detention on Nauru
How Kym Richardson voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should close its Nauru Regional Processing Centre and stop all Nauru-based processing of people's claims for asylum
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for ending immigration detention on Nauru” which Kym Richardson could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Kym Richardson on this policy.
| Division | Kym Richardson | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for ending immigration detention on Nauru” which Kym Richardson could have attended.
| Division | Kym Richardson | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
10th Aug 2006, 12:57 PM – Representatives Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 - Third Reading - Read a third time |
absent | No |
10th Aug 2006, 12:46 PM – Representatives Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 - Second Reading - Read a second time |
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 Kym Richardson was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.