We can't say anything concrete about how Stephen Parry voted on Preventative Detention Orders (PDOs)
How Stephen Parry voted compared to someone who agrees that the police should be able to detain people without charge for a limited period if there is a threat of a terrorist attack or if it is likely that vital evidence will be lost after a terrorist attack takes place
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for Preventative Detention Orders (PDOs)” which Stephen Parry could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Stephen Parry on this policy.
| Division | Stephen Parry | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
28th Oct 2014, 9:10 PM – Senate Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment (Foreign Fighters) Bill 2014 - In Committee - Extend sunset clauses |
absent | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for Preventative Detention Orders (PDOs)” which Stephen Parry could have attended.
| Division | Stephen Parry | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
8th Nov 2016, 7:24 PM – Senate Counter-Terrorism Legislation Amendment Bill (No. 1) 2016 - Second Reading - Agree to the bill's main idea |
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 Stephen Parry was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.