How Nick McKim voted compared to someone who believes that telecommunications providers should be required to store all their customers' usages data for later access by agencies with the Attorney General's consent

Division Nick McKim Supporters vote Division outcome

16th Mar 2016 – Senate Motions - Mandatory Telecommunications Data Retention Scheme - Repeal the scheme

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam about the mandatory telecommunications data retention scheme.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the expensive, intrusive and ultimately pointless mandatory telecommunications data retention scheme was introduced in the 2015-16 Budget at a cost to taxpayers of $153.8 million,

(ii) mandatory data retention forces Australian Internet service providers and telecommunications carriers to retain comprehensive records on their customers' Internet and telephone habits for a period of 2 years,

(iii) the full cost of the scheme is in excess of $300 million but costs just 15 cents per day to circumvent via simple steps such as those helpfully articulated by the Prime Minister (Mr Turnbull), and

(iv) since the Australian Labor Party supported the Government in passing the bill, the number of additional agencies requesting warrantless access to metadata has included the Australian Taxation Office, the Australian Border Force and the Victorian Racing Integrity Commissioner; and

(b) calls on the Government to repeal the scheme.

absent No (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

How "never voted" 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 Nick McKim was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other than that they have "never voted" on this policy.