How Bob Debus voted compared to someone who believes that Members of Parliament (MPs) and Senators should vote against all motions that stop an MP or Senator from speaking (that is, motions that the MP or Senator 'be no longer heard')

Division Bob Debus Supporters vote Division outcome

19th Mar 2008, 9:16 AM – Representatives Motions — Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008 — That the member be no longer heard

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Labor MP Anthony Albanese. The motion was: "That the member be no longer heard" and referred to Liberal MP Judi Moylan.

This sort of motion cuts debate short and is known as a ‘closure of Member’.(See this infosheet for more information on these types of motions.) Passing this motion means that Ms Moylan can no longer speak.

Background to the motion

The motion was put after Ms Moylan seconded a motion put by Liberal MP Petro Georgiou related to the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008. That bill provides for the appointment of an independent person to review the operation, effectiveness and implications of laws relating to terrorism.

References

Yes No (strong) Passed by a small majority

19th Mar 2008, 9:07 AM – Representatives Motions - Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008 - That the member be no longer heard

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Labor MP Anthony Albanese. The motion was: "That the member be no longer heard" and referred to Liberal MP Petro Georgiou.

This sort of motion cuts debate short and is known as a ‘closure of Member’.(See this infosheet for more information on these types of motions.) Passing this motion means that Mr Georgiou can no longer speak.

Background to the motion

The motion was put after Mr Georgiou put a motion related to the Independent Reviewer of Terrorism Laws Bill 2008. That bill provides for the appointment of an independent person to review the operation, effectiveness and implications of laws relating to terrorism.

References

Yes No (strong) Passed by a small majority

How "voted very 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 2 0 100
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 100

*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 = 0 / 100 = 0.0%.

And then