Compare how Kelvin Thomson and Melissa Parke voted on increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management

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 increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management” which either Kelvin Thomson or Melissa Parke could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Kelvin Thomson and Melissa Parke 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	Kelvin Thomson	Melissa Parke	Supporters vote
4th Dec 2014 – Representatives Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Bill 2014 - Consideration of Senate Message - Agree with Senate's amendments	No	No	No
22nd Oct 2014, 5:12 PM – Representatives Migration and Maritime Powers Legislation Amendment (Resolving the Asylum Legacy Caseload) Bill 2014 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea	No	absent	No

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing scrutiny of asylum seeker management” which either Kelvin Thomson or Melissa Parke 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	Kelvin Thomson	Melissa Parke	Supporters vote
no votes listed