How Bob Carr voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should support the exportation of uranium from Australia

Division Bob Carr Supporters vote Division outcome

13th Mar 2013, 3:58 PM – Senate Motions — Uranium Exports - Review all bilateral uranium supply arrangements

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australian uranium is confirmed to have been present in each of the reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear power station on 11 March 2011,

(ii) the disaster is ongoing 2 years later, with continuing radiation leaks, and that 160 000 people remain displaced from their homes with inadequate compensation to resettle,

(iii) decommissioning is expected to take over 40 years at a cost of A$100 billion, and

(iv) approximately 2 000 samples of food and game tested for radiation between April 2012 and January 2013 exceeded the limit for human consumption of radioactive isotopes; and

(b) calls on the Australian Government to undertake an immediate review of all bilateral uranium supply arrangements to assess the risk of future disasters at nuclear power stations in countries to which Australia supplies uranium.

absent No Not passed by a modest majority

22nd Mar 2012, 1:46 PM – Senate Motions — Nuclear Energy - India and other countries standing outside the NPT

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it has been rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) that a crackdown by over 6 000 police on non-violent anti-nuclear power protestors, including arrests for sedition and the prohibition on people congregating, occurred at the construction site of a nuclear reactor near the fishing village of Koodankulam in south India on 19 March and 20 March 2012,

(ii) that 20 000 people gathered on 20 March 2012 with thousands on an indefinite hunger strike until the non-violent protestors are released,

(iii) a growing mass movement in India opposed to nuclear power includes protests in Jaitapur, Maharashtra and Gorakhpur, Haryana,

(iv) the sale of uranium to India while that country refuses to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) would be illegal under the Treaty of Rarotonga, signed by the Australian Government in 1985,

(v) the 1998 United National Security Council resolution 1172 'encourages all States to prevent the export of equipment, materials or technology that could in any way assist programmes in India or Pakistan for nuclear weapons or for ballistic missiles capable of delivering such weapons, and welcomes national policies adopted and declared in this respect', and

(vi) the Nuclear Security Summit will be held on 26 March and 27 March 2012 in South Korea; and

(b) calls on the Government to utilise all diplomatic channels to:

(i) protest the Indian Government's unprecedented deployment of police around Koodankulam and the harassment of peaceful protestors as inconsistent with the democratic right to peaceful protest,

(ii) caution the Indian Government against loading uranium fuel rods into the reactor at Koodankulam without conducting any safety or evacuation drills, mandatory exercises under the Indian Atomic Energy Regulatory Board rules,

(iii) promote the independence of nuclear regulators from industry and government as best international practice, and

(iv) not sell uranium to countries that stand outside the NPT and its associated safeguards system.

absent No Not passed by a modest 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 Bob Carr 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.