We can't say anything concrete about how John Faulkner voted on putting a time limit on immigration detention
How John Faulkner voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should put a time limit on how long asylum seekers can be detained while their claims for asylum are being processed
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for putting a time limit on immigration detention” which John Faulkner could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of John Faulkner on this policy.
| Division | John Faulkner | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for putting a time limit on immigration detention” which John Faulkner could have attended.
| Division | John Faulkner | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
10th Oct 2012, 11:30 AM – Senate Motions - Manus Island - 12 month limit on detention |
absent | Yes |
12th Sep 2012, 11:45 AM – Senate Motions - Republic of Nauru - 12 month limit on detention |
No | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
John Faulkner has only voted once on this policy and it wasn't on a "strong" vote. So it's not possible to draw a clear conclusion about their position.
This could be because there were simply not many relevant divisions (formal votes) during the time they've been in parliament (most votes happen on "the voices", so we simply have no decent record) or they were absent for votes that could have contributed to their voting record.