How Brian Burston voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should address the causes and consequences of climate change as a matter of urgency by, for example, lowering emissions and investing in science and technology

Division Brian Burston Supporters vote Division outcome

15th Feb 2018, 12:07 PM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - Action

Show detail

The majority voted against this motion, which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) welcomes the visit by a delegation of leaders from the Kiribati Climate Action Network and the Kiribati Ministry of Education;

(b) notes the strong bonds that exists between the people of Australia and the people of Kiribati;

(c) notes, with deep concern, the impacts that climate change is already having on Kiribati, including soil erosion and salinity, which is affecting crops and drinking water;

(d) is further concerned at reports from the 23th United Nations Climate Change Conference in 2017, that the Australian delegation pushed back against poorer countries, including Kiribati, who were calling for more funding for loss and damage caused by climate change; and

(e) calls on the Government to:

(i) increase its support to Pacific Island nations, including Kiribati, through climate finance that is separate and additional to our existing official development assistance budget,

(ii) significantly increase our commitments to cut emissions under the Paris Agreement in 2018, and take into account loss and damage caused by climate change, and

(iii) commit to no new coal mines in Australia, and rule out Adani's Carmichael coal mine.

No Yes Not passed by a modest majority

13th Sep 2017, 5:38 PM – Senate Motions - Energy - Transition for coal workforce required

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Richard Di Natale.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) considers coal-fired power stations in Australia will need to close in order to deal with climate change; and

(b) notes that the Government must have a plan for a managed transition of the workforce and to a clean energy future.

No Yes Not passed by a large majority

5th Sep 2017, 5:02 PM – Senate Motions - Energy - Coal not clean

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion: That the Senate does not consider coal-fired power to be clean.

This motion was introduced by WA Senator Rachel Siewert (Greens) also on behalf of Victorian Senator Richard Di Natale (Greens).

No Yes Passed by a small majority

How "voted moderately 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 3 0 30
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 8 8 16
Total: 8 46

*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 = 8 / 46 = 17%.

And then