Compare how Rebekha Sharkie and Justine Keay voted on a combined Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia

Photo of Rebekha Sharkie

Rebekha Sharkie

Centre Alliance Representative for Mayo since July 2018

Voted generally against a combined Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia
Photo of Justine Keay

Justine Keay

Former Australian Labor Party Representative for Braddon July 2018 – May 2019

Voted consistently against a combined Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia

How they voted compared with each other and someone who agrees that the federal government should unify the Federal Circuit Court of Australia and the Family Court of Australia so that they are one court to be known as the Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia

Now this is where it gets a bit tricky… Two people might vote the same way on votes they both attended, so their votes are 100% in agreement. They might also have voted in a way we’d describe differently when looking at all of one person's votes. If the other person didn’t or couldn’t have attended those votes we leave those out of the comparison. Because that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it?

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for a combined Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia” which either Rebekha Sharkie or Justine Keay could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Rebekha Sharkie and Justine Keay on this policy. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".

Division Rebekha Sharkie Justine Keay Supporters vote

18th Feb 2021, 10:56 AM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 - Consideration of Senate Message - Agree with Senate amendments and so pass bills

No - Yes

1st Dec 2020, 5:17 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2019 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

No - Yes

1st Dec 2020, 5:14 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

No - Yes

1st Dec 2020, 5:07 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

No - Yes

1st Dec 2020, 5:05 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2019 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

No - Yes

27th Nov 2018, 5:23 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2018 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Yes No Yes

27th Nov 2018, 5:14 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia (Consequential Amendments and Transitional Provisions) Bill 2018 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea

Yes No Yes

27th Nov 2018, 5:03 PM – Representatives Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia Bill 2018 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Yes No Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for a combined Federal Circuit and Family Court of Australia” which either Rebekha Sharkie or Justine Keay could have attended. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".

Division Rebekha Sharkie Justine Keay Supporters vote
no votes listed