How John Forrest voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should close its Manus Regional Processing Centre and stop all Manus-based processing of people's claims for asylum

Division John Forrest Supporters vote Division outcome

27th Nov 2012, 8:18 PM – Representatives Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill a second time.

This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that it can now be discussed in greater detail.

The main idea of the bill is to ensure that asylum seekers who unlawfully arrive anywhere in Australia are subject to the same regional processing arrangements as asylum seekers who arrive at an excised offshore place such as Christmas Island.

Background of the Bill

This bill was introduced in response to a report by the Expert Panel on Asylum Seekers, particularly Recommendation 14 which states that: "the Migration Act 1958 be amended so that arrival anywhere on Australia by irregular maritime means will not provide individuals with a different lawful status than those who arrive in an excise offshore place".(Read the full report here. )

By implementing this recommendation, the bill extends the excision regime that was introduced in 2001 following the Tampa affair. That regime provides that asylum seekers who arrive in Australia at excised offshore places are unable to apply for protection visas (in effect, refugee status under Australian law) unless the Minister for Immigration and Citizenship decides it is in the public interest that they do so. The effect of this bill will be to extend the excision provisions to the whole country.(More information on the Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012 is available on the bills digest (680 KB). Also see an ABC news report explaining the effect of this bill here.)

This means that all asylum seekers arriving by boat in either mainland Australia or an offshore Australian territory that has been excised are unable to apply for protection visas and will be sent to regional processing countries (currently Papua New Guinea and Nauru) for the processing of their refugee claims. The rationale behind this legislation is the need to discourage asylum seekers arriving in Australia by boat because of the dangers involved.

References

absent No Passed by a large majority

10th Aug 2006, 12:57 PM – Representatives Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 - Third Reading - Read a third time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to agree to the remaining stages of the bill, including the government amendments as circulated.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. )

This means that the bill is now passed in the House of Representatives and can now be sent to the Senate for their consideration.

Three Liberal Party ministers rebelled and crossed the floor to vote 'no' with the opposition in this division:(Read more about what it means to cross the floor in our FAQ section. ) Russell Broadbent, Petro Georgiou and Judi Moylan.

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to expand the offshore processing regime(Read more about Australia's offshore processing regime here. ) to include all people arriving at mainland Australia unlawfully by sea on or after 13 April 2006.(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memoranda, here. For more background, read its bills digest (293 KB).) This means that all such people will be treated as if they had landed in an excised place, meaning an place that is excluded from the migration zone.

References

absent No Passed by a small majority

10th Aug 2006, 12:46 PM – Representatives Migration Amendment (Designated Unauthorised Arrivals) Bill 2006 - Second Reading - Read a second time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a second time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. )

This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill.

Three Liberal Party ministers rebelled and crossed the floor to vote 'no' with the opposition in this division:(Read more about what it means to cross the floor in our FAQ section. ) Russell Broadbent, Petro Georgiou and Judi Moylan.

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to expand the offshore processing regime(Read more about Australia's offshore processing regime here. ) to include all people arriving at mainland Australia unlawfully by sea on or after 13 April 2006.(Read more about the bill, including its explanatory memoranda, here. For more background, read its bills digest (293 KB).) This means that all such people will be treated as if they had landed in an excised place, meaning an place that is excluded from the migration zone.

References

absent No Passed by a small majority

How "never voted" 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 John Forrest was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other than that they have "never voted" on this policy.