We can't say anything concrete about how Brett Mason voted on ending immigration detention on Nauru
How Brett Mason voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should close its Nauru Regional Processing Centre and stop all Nauru-based processing of people's claims for asylum
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for ending immigration detention on Nauru” which Brett Mason could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Brett Mason on this policy.
Division | Brett Mason | Supporters vote | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
no votes listed |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for ending immigration detention on Nauru” which Brett Mason could have attended.
Division | Brett Mason | Supporters vote |
---|---|---|
16th May 2013, 12:15 PM – Senate Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - Third Reading - Read a third time |
absent | No |
16th May 2013, 10:42 AM – Senate Migration Amendment (Unauthorised Maritime Arrivals and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time |
absent | No |
12th Sep 2012, 11:49 AM – Senate Motions - Republic of Nauru - Designate Nauru as regional processing country |
absent | No |
16th Aug 2012, 10:21 PM – Senate Migration Legislation Amendment (Regional Processing and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - Third Reading - Read a third time |
absent | No |
16th Aug 2012, 5:22 PM – Senate Migration Legislation Amendment (Regional Processing and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - Second Reading - Read a second time |
Yes | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Brett Mason 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.