We can't say anything concrete about how Paul Calvert voted on increasing protection of Aboriginal heritage sites
How Paul Calvert voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase the protection of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander cultural heritage sites
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing protection of Aboriginal heritage sites” which Paul Calvert could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Paul Calvert on this policy.
| Division | Paul Calvert | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing protection of Aboriginal heritage sites” which Paul Calvert could have attended.
| Division | Paul Calvert | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
16th Aug 2006, 3:57 PM – Senate Motions - Burrup Peninsula Rock Art - Protect rock art |
absent | Yes |
28th Mar 2006, 5:26 PM – Senate Motions — Tarkine Aboriginal Rock Art — Prevent vandalism |
No | Yes |
28th Mar 2006, 4:06 PM – Senate Motions - Tarkine Aboriginal Rock Art - Prevent vandalism |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Paul Calvert 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.