We can't say anything concrete about how Chris Ellison voted on implementing refugee and protection conventions
How Chris Ellison voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should implement the international conventions that relate to seeking refuge and protection from torture. These include the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and the non-refoulement provisions of the UN Convention Against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for implementing refugee and protection conventions” which Chris Ellison could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Chris Ellison on this policy.
| Division | Chris Ellison | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for implementing refugee and protection conventions” which Chris Ellison could have attended.
| Division | Chris Ellison | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
26th Feb 2007, 5:03 PM – Senate Matters of Urgency - Asylum Seekers - Non-refoulment |
absent | Yes |
20th Jun 2006, 4:05 PM – Senate Motions - World Refugee Day - Refugee Convention |
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 Chris Ellison was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete.