We can't say anything concrete about how Kim Carr voted on increasing or removing the Government debt limit
How Kim Carr voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase the limit on the total amount of Commonwealth stock and securities that may be on issue at any time (known as the 'debt limit') or remove the limit altogether
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing or removing the Government debt limit” which Kim Carr could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Kim Carr on this policy.
| Division | Kim Carr | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing or removing the Government debt limit” which Kim Carr could have attended.
| Division | Kim Carr | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
9th Dec 2013, 12:53 PM – Senate Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013 - Consideration of House of Representatives Message - Adopt report |
absent | Yes |
9th Dec 2013, 12:44 PM – Senate Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013 - Consideration of House of Representatives Message - Agree to bill as amended |
absent | Yes |
9th Dec 2013, 12:38 PM – Senate Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013 - Consideration of House of Representatives Message - Removing debt limit |
absent | Yes |
14th Nov 2013, 1:09 PM – Senate Commonwealth Inscribed Stock Amendment Bill 2013 - In Committee - Debt ceiling of $400 billion |
Yes | No |
25th Jun 2012, 9:35 PM – Senate Appropriation Bill (No. 2) 2012-2013 - Second Reading - Increase debt limit |
absent | Yes |
How "We can't say anything concrete about how they voted on" is worked out
Kim Carr 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.