We can't say anything concrete about how Karen Grogan voted on more scrutiny of intelligence services & police
How Karen Grogan 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 Karen Grogan could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Karen Grogan on this policy.
| Division | Karen Grogan | 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 Karen Grogan could have attended.
| Division | Karen Grogan | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
30th Mar 2022, 8:27 PM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Comprehensive Review and Other Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
Yes | No |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Karen Grogan 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.