We can't say anything concrete about how Kim Carr voted on a transition plan for coal workers
How Kim Carr voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should develop and implement a plan to transition workers in the coal industry to other industries
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for a transition plan for coal workers” 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 a transition plan for coal workers” which Kim Carr could have attended.
| Division | Kim Carr | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
16th Jun 2020, 4:50 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Transition to renewables |
absent | Yes |
9th Sep 2019, 5:07 PM – Senate Motions - Energy - Clean energy industry |
absent | Yes |
22nd Mar 2017, 5:05 PM – Senate Motions - Energy - Transition plan for coal workers |
absent | Yes |
8th Feb 2007, 10:57 AM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - Reduce coal exports |
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 Kim Carr was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.