We can't say anything concrete about how Kim Carr voted on procedural fairness
How Kim Carr voted compared to someone who agrees that all Australian laws should be subject to procedural fairness requirements so that people can request reasons for government decisions that impact them personally and can appeal those decisions on the basis of whether they were made lawfully
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for procedural fairness” 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 procedural fairness” which Kim Carr could have attended.
| Division | Kim Carr | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
30th Mar 2022, 8:37 PM – Senate National Disability Insurance Scheme Amendment (Participant Service Guarantee and Other Measures) Bill 2022 - Consideration of amendments - Greens amendments |
absent | Yes |
3rd Dec 2020, 9:44 AM – Senate Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020 - in Committee - Procedural fairness |
absent | No |
2nd Dec 2020, 7:24 PM – Senate Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020 and another - in Committee - Reasons and review |
absent | Yes |
2nd Dec 2020, 12:40 PM – Senate Australia's Foreign Relations (State and Territory Arrangements) Bill 2020 and another - in Committee - Reasons and review |
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.