Compare how Michael Forshaw and David Feeney voted on increasing surveillance powers

Photo of Michael Forshaw

Michael Forshaw

Former Australian Labor Party Senator for NSW May 1994 – June 2011

Voted a mixture of for and against increasing surveillance powers
Photo of David Feeney

David Feeney

Former Australian Labor Party Representative for Batman September 2013 – February 2018

Voted consistently for increasing surveillance powers

How they voted compared with each other and someone who agrees that the federal government should introduce legislation to increase the powers of intelligence and law enforcement agencies to intercept and retain communications related to persons of interest. These agencies include the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) and the Australian Federal Police (AFP).

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 surveillance powers” which either Michael Forshaw or David Feeney could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Michael Forshaw and David Feeney 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 Michael Forshaw David Feeney Supporters vote

22nd Aug 2012, 12:34 PM – Senate Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

- Yes Yes

22nd Aug 2012, 11:53 AM – Senate Cybercrime Legislation Amendment Bill 2011 - In Committee - Agree to amendments introducing limitations on access and disclosure

- No No

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing surveillance powers” which either Michael Forshaw or David Feeney 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 Michael Forshaw David Feeney Supporters vote

27th Feb 2013, 4:11 PM – Senate Motions - National Security Inquiry - Abandon plan to retain data for up to two years

- No No

2nd Mar 2011, 12:30 PM – Senate Telecommunications Interception and Intelligence Services Legislation Amendment Bill 2010 — In Committee - ASIO's annual report (access to information)

No No No

20th Sep 2007, 7:53 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception and Access) Amendment Bill 2007 — In Committee — Require judicial warrants

absent - No

30th Mar 2006, 1:37 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee - Schedule 3 (equipment based interception)

Yes - Yes

30th Mar 2006, 1:15 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee — Schedule 2 (B—party interceptions)

No - Yes

30th Mar 2006, 12:21 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee — Schedule 2 (B—party interceptions)

No - No

30th Mar 2006, 12:18 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee — B—party interceptions

Yes - No

28th Mar 2006, 10:47 PM – Senate Telecommunications (Interception) Amendment Bill 2006 — In Committee - Sunset clause and review

Yes - No