How Kristina Keneally voted compared to someone who believes that even though public housing is controlled by our state governments, the federal government should also take action to increase the availability of affordable public housing around Australia

Division Kristina Keneally Supporters vote Division outcome

18th Jun 2020, 12:00 PM – Senate Motions - Covid-19 - Housing and renters' rights

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by NSW Senator Mehreen Faruqi (Greens), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate:

(a) notes that:

(i) the COVID-19 crisis has further exposed existing inequalities in our broken housing system,

(ii) renters across Australia face eviction as COVID-19 related eviction bans come to an end across states and territories, and

(iii) as the economic crisis continues, more people are at risk of homelessness than ever before;

(b) calls on the Government to:

(i) increase funding for emergency housing,

(ii) invest in building more public and community housing which will create construction jobs and apprenticeships, and provide homes for people,

(iii) direct lenders to implement mortgage relief, where needed, with no interest accrual, a ban on foreclosures and a freeze on owners' credit ratings,

(iv) permanently increase income support, and

(v) implement a national plan to end homelessness; and

(c) calls on the National Cabinet to:

(i) implement waivers for rent arrears, with relief for those with rental debts, and

(ii) agree on a national standard of renters' rights and rental laws to protect people from unfair evictions.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

20th Sep 2018, 12:43 PM – Senate Motions - Homelessness - National strategy

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Greens Senator Mehreen Faruqi (NSW) and Labor Senator Doug Cameron (NSW), which means it succeeded.

Motions like these don't make any legal changes on their own. However, they are politically influential as they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the Coalition Government has failed to commit to any specific targets to reduce homelessness,

(ii) homelessness has risen by 14 per cent, and the number of people sleeping rough has risen by an alarming 20 per cent since 2011, and

(iii) homelessness service providers are calling for a national solution to end homelessness; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to develop and implement a well-resourced National Homelessness Strategy that:

(i) has specific targets to reduce homelessness,

(ii) develops and implements approaches, in partnership with states and territories, to prevent homelessness, and

(iii) develops and implements a framework of continued support for people to break the cycle of homelessness.

Yes Yes Passed by a small majority

19th Jun 2018, 4:33 PM – Senate Motions - Social Housing - Reject charging market rates

Show detail

The majority supported a motion introduced by Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon also in the name of Labor Senator Doug Cameron, which means it succeeded. Motions like these don’t change the law by themselves but can be politically influential as they represent the political will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the latest census data indicates that there has been a 13 per cent rise in homelessness since 2011,

(ii) a well-functioning social housing system that is affordable for tenants is important in reducing homelessness,

(iii) charging tenants a proportion of income as rent, as opposed to market rent, has proved an effective way to ensure affordability, and

(iv) the Productivity Commission's report no. 85, Introducing Competition and Informed User Choice into Human Services: Reforms to Human Services, recommends state and territory governments charge new social housing tenant market rents; and

(b) calls on the Turnbull Government to reject the recommendation that state and territory governments charge social housing tenants market rates.

Yes Yes Passed by a small majority

How "voted very strongly for" 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 2 20 20
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 1 1 2
Total: 21 22

*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 = 21 / 22 = 95%.

And then