How Bert Van Manen voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should increase restrictions on the gambling industry in order to address the issue of problem gambling

Division Bert Van Manen Supporters vote Division outcome

8th Feb 2017, 5:11 PM – Representatives Interactive Gambling Amendment Bill 2016 - Second Reading - Phase out ads relating to betting or gambling

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion, which means it was unsuccessful.

It was introduced by Labor MP Julie Collins (Franklin)

Motion text

That all the words after "That" be omitted with a view to substituting the following words:

"whilst not declining to give the bill a second reading, the House calls on the Government to work with the broadcasting industry and national sporting organisations on a transition plan to phase out the promotion of betting odds and commercials relating to betting or gambling before and during live sporting broadcasts, with a view to their prohibition".

No Yes Not passed by a small majority

29th Nov 2012, 1:55 PM – Representatives National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 - Consideration in Detail - Agree to the bill

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion that this bill, as amended, be agreed to. This means that the majority agree with the bill, as it has been amended, and that they can now decide on whether to pass the bill in the House of Representatives.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. )

Background to the bill

The National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 was introduced along with the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012 and the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.

According to the bills digest, these bills introduce the following:

  • from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
  • by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
  • from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the bills digest of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.

)

Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority Gillard Labor Government after the 2010 election.(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment here. ) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment capability.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News here.) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.

absent Yes Passed by a small majority

29th Nov 2012, 1:24 PM – Representatives National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 — Second Reading — Read a second time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion that the bill be read for a second time. This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bill and that the House can now discuss it in more detail.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. )

Background to the bill

The National Gambling Reform Bill 2012 was introduced along with the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 1) 2012 and the National Gambling Reform (Related Matters) Bill (No. 2) 2012. Together, these bills relate to a national scheme for gaming machines in order to reduce the harms associated with gambling on these machines.

According to the bills digest, these bills introduce the following:

  • from the end of 2013, new electronic gaming machines ('EGMs') either manufactured in, or imported into, Australia be capable of supporting an approved precommitment system
  • by 2016, EGMs be linked together as part of a state-wide or territory-wide precommitment system, and display electronic warning messages (with extended timelines for smaller venues) and
  • from 1 May 2013 Automatic Teller Machines (ATMs) located in gaming venues have a $250 daily withdrawal limit.(Read more about the bills in the bills digest of the National Gambling Reform Bill 2012.

)

Precommitment involves a gambler setting a loss limit before they commence playing. Independent MP Andrew Wilkie made the introduction of mandatory precommitment a key part of his agreement to support the minority Gillard Labor Government after the 2010 election.(Read more about Mr Wilkie's commitment to introducing precommitment here. ) Although the Labor Government originally agreed to introduce mandatory precommitment, these bills limit the reforms to ensuring the EGMs have precommitment capability.(Read more about the change in the Labor Government's approach to gambling reform on ABC News here.) There will also be a mandatory precommitment trial, to test its feasibility.

absent Yes Passed by a small majority

How "voted strongly against" is worked out

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get 50 points, less important votes get 10 points, and less important votes for which the MP was absent get 2 points. In important votes the MP gets awarded the full 50 points for voting the same as the policy, 0 points for voting against the policy, and 25 points for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets 10 points for voting with the policy, 0 points for voting against, and 1 (out of 2) if absent.

Then, the number gets converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.

No of votes Points Out of
Most important votes (50 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 2 2 4
Total: 2 14

*Pressure of other work means MPs or Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less important vote makes a disproportionatly small difference.

Agreement score = MP's points / total points = 2 / 14 = 14%.

And then