How Concetta Fierravanti-Wells voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should decrease the private health insurance rebate that eligible taxpayers are entitled to

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for decreasing the private health insurance rebate” which Concetta Fierravanti-Wells could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Concetta Fierravanti-Wells on this policy.

Division Concetta Fierravanti-Wells Supporters vote

15th Mar 2012, 6:13 PM – Senate Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2012 and related bills - Third Reading - Read a third time

No Yes

15th Mar 2012, 6:04 PM – Senate Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2012 and related bills - Second Reading - Read a second time

No Yes

9th Mar 2010, 5:51 PM – Senate Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2009 [No. 2] - Second Reading - Read a second time

No Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for decreasing the private health insurance rebate” which Concetta Fierravanti-Wells could have attended.

Division Concetta Fierravanti-Wells Supporters vote

27th Jun 2013, 11:03 PM – Senate Private Health Insurance Amendment (Lifetime Health Cover Loading and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - Third Reading - Read a third time

No Yes

27th Jun 2013, 10:59 PM – Senate Private Health Insurance Amendment (Lifetime Health Cover Loading and Other Measures) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Keep schedule 1 unchanged

No Yes

13th Mar 2012, 6:35 PM – Senate Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2012 and related bills - Reference to Committee - Refer to the Economics Legislation Committee

Yes No

9th Sep 2009, 7:06 PM – Senate Fairer Private Health Insurance Incentives Bill 2009 and related bills - Second Reading - Read a second time

absent Yes

5th Dec 2006, 12:40 PM – Senate Medibank Private Sale Bill 2006 - In Committee - Abolish the private health insurance rebate

No Yes

22nd Jun 2006, 10:42 PM – Senate Health Legislation Amendment (Private Health Insurance) Bill 2006 - In Committee - Abolish the private health insurance rebate

No Yes

How "voted consistently against" is worked out

They Vote For You gives each vote a score based on whether the MP voted in agreement with the policy or not. These scores are then averaged with a weighting across all votes that the MP could have voted on relevant to the policy. The overall average score is then converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

When an MP votes in agreement with a policy the vote is scored as 100%. When they vote against the policy it is scored as 0% and when they are absent it is scored half way between the two at 50%. The half way point effectively says "we don't know whether they are for or against this policy".

The overall agreement score for the policy is worked out by a weighted average of the scores for each vote. The weighting has been chosen so that the most important votes have a weighting 5 times that of the less important votes. Also, absent votes on less important votes are weighted 5 times less again to not penalise MPs for not attending the less important votes. Pressure of other work means MPs or Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always mean they've abstained.

Type of vote Agreement score (s) Weight (w) No of votes (n)
Most important votes MP voted with policy 100% 25 0
MP voted against policy 0% 25 3
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 0
MP voted against policy 0% 5 5
MP absent 50% 1 1

The final agreement score is a weighted average (weighted arithmetic mean) of the scores of the individual votes.

Average agreement score = sum(n×w×s) / sum(n×w) = 0.5 / 101 = 0.5%.

And then this average agreement score