We can't say anything concrete about how David Pocock voted on Preventative Detention Orders (PDOs)
How David Pocock voted compared to someone who agrees that the police should be able to detain people without charge for a limited period if there is a threat of a terrorist attack or if it is likely that vital evidence will be lost after a terrorist attack takes place
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for Preventative Detention Orders (PDOs)” which David Pocock could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of David Pocock on this policy.
| Division | David Pocock | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
14th Nov 2023, 12:22 PM – Senate Counter-Terrorism and Other Legislation Amendment Bill 2023 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for Preventative Detention Orders (PDOs)” which David Pocock could have attended.
| Division | David Pocock | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
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 David Pocock was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.