Photo of Kerry Nettle

Kerry Nettle voted consistently against privatising government assets

How Kerry Nettle voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should privatise government owned assets

Division Kerry Nettle Supporters vote Division outcome

13th Sep 2007, 9:43 AM – Senate Motions - New South Wales Electricity Industry - Abandon plan to privatise

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Kerry Nettle, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the New South Wales Government is openly canvassing the privatisation of its electricity industry, despite going to successive elections with a promise to keep the industry in public hands,

(ii) electricity generation is responsible for 37 per cent of greenhouse gas emissions from New South Wales,

(iii) public utilities in New South Wales employ 24 000 people,

(iv) privatisation of the New South Wales electricity industry will have serious, irreversible and negative effects on Australia’s response to climate change, employment in regional Australia and government revenue, and

(v) the New South Wales Government was forced to abandon its plan to privatise the Snowy Mountains Scheme by a concerted community campaign; and

(b) calls on the New South Wales Government to also abandon its support for privatising the electricity industry either by sale or lease.

 Yes No Not passed by a large majority

5th Dec 2006, 12:47 PM – Senate Medibank Private Sale Bill 2006 - Third Reading - Read a third time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a third time.(Read more about the stages that a bill must pass through here. ) This means that the majority agree that the bill should be passed in the Senate. As it has already passed in the House of Representatives,(See that division here. ) the bill will now become law.

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to allow the federal government to sell its interest in Medibank Private Limited and allow Medibank to operate on a “for profit” basis. The Coalition Government plans to do this after the 2007 election, should it be re-elected.(Read more about this privatisation proposal on Wikipedia here and on the ABC's World Today program here.)

 No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

4th Dec 2006, 8:28 PM – Senate Medibank Private Sale Bill 2006 - Second Reading - Read a second time

Show detail

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

One senator, Australian Democrat Senator Andrew Bartlett, rebelled against his party and crossed the floor to vote 'no' against this motion.(Read more about what it means to cross the floor in our FAQ Section. )

Background to the bill

The bill was introduced to allow the federal government to sell its interest in Medibank Private Limited and allow Medibank to operate on a “for profit” basis. The Coalition Government plans to do this after the 2007 election, should it be re-elected.(Read more about this privatisation proposal on Wikipedia here and on the ABC's World Today program here.)

 No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

How "voted consistently 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 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 110

*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 / 110 = 0.0%.

And then