We can't say anything concrete about how Ross Cadell voted on more scrutiny of intelligence services & police
How Ross Cadell voted compared to someone who agrees that there should be more scrutiny or oversight of the actions and powers of Australian intelligence and law enforcement agencies, including the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO), the Australian Secret Intelligence Service (ASIS) and the Australian Federal Police (AFP)
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for more scrutiny of intelligence services & police” which Ross Cadell could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Ross Cadell on this policy.
| Division | Ross Cadell | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for more scrutiny of intelligence services & police” which Ross Cadell could have attended.
| Division | Ross Cadell | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
30th Mar 2023, 11:24 AM – Senate Committees - Selection of Bills Committee; Report - National Security Legislation Amendment (Comprehensive Review and Other Measures No. 2) Bill 2023 |
absent | Yes |
27th Oct 2022, 11:11 AM – Senate Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (AFP Powers and Other Matters) Bill 2022 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
Yes | No |
7th Sep 2022, 3:46 PM – Senate Documents - Australian Federal Police; Order for the Production of Documents - Myanmar police |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Ross Cadell 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.