How Jim Molan voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government needs to support research and conservation initiatives that aim to put a stop to the current trajectory of animal and plant extinctions in Australia

Division Jim Molan Supporters vote Division outcome

4th Dec 2018, 4:50 PM – Senate Motions - United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity - Heed recommendations

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion, which means it succeeded. Motion like these don't make any legal changes on their own but can be politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity took place in Egypt from 13 to 29 November 2018,

(ii) the United Nations report to the Convention demonstrated that Australia is failing to meet international targets, especially in parts of the country where land clearing and habitat destruction are widespread,

(iii) the World Wildlife Fund also issued a report, as part of the conference, that placed Australia amongst the worst performers on biodiversity in a group of 100 nations, and

(iv) the Convention called on governments to scale up investments in nature and people towards 2020 and beyond, and to accelerate action to achieve Aichi Biodiversity Targets by 2020; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to heed the recommendations of the Convention.

No Yes Passed by a small majority

14th Feb 2018, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Tasmania: Environment - Tarkine

Show detail

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

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Tasmania's unique environment is under threat from inappropriate development, and the failure to protect natural and cultural values,

(ii) rapid and unfettered expansion of fish farms is privatising public waters and damaging Tasmania's marine environment and coastal lifestyle,

(iii) private sector development in Tasmania's iconic national parks and world heritage areas is continuing,

(iv) the Swift Parrot is facing extinction due to ongoing deforestation of its habitat by logging, and

(v) Tasmanian Aboriginal heritage is being damaged by four wheel drive tracks in the Tarkine area; and

(b) condemns the Federal and Tasmanian Liberal Governments for failing to stand up for Tasmania's unique natural environment, their lack of support for a Tarkine national park, and complete inaction on climate change.

No Yes Not passed by a modest 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 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 2 0 20
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 20

*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 / 20 = 0.0%.

And then