How Nigel Scullion voted compared to someone who agrees that Strong encryption technologies are critical and necessary enablers of communications and commerce. Strong encryption technologies should not be restricted, back-doored, undermined or crippled by law.

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for the use of strong encryption technologies” which Nigel Scullion could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Nigel Scullion on this policy.

Division Nigel Scullion Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for the use of strong encryption technologies” which Nigel Scullion could have attended.

Division Nigel Scullion Supporters vote

6th Dec 2018, 7:22 PM – Senate Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

absent No

6th Dec 2018, 7:09 PM – Senate Telecommunications and Other Legislation Amendment (Assistance and Access) Bill 2018 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

absent No

15th Aug 2018, 4:06 PM – Senate Motions - Digital Encryption - Warrant and privacy

absent Yes

23rd Feb 2016, 4:00 PM – Senate Motions - Digital Encryption - Develop technology

absent Yes

14th Nov 2013, 11:34 AM – Senate Motions - Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee Reference - Surveillance

absent Yes

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 Nigel Scullion was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.