How Perin Davey voted compared to someone who believes that the Australian Government should provide more transparency of our country's political relationship with China

Division Perin Davey Supporters vote Division outcome

3rd Dec 2019, 7:10 PM – Senate Committees - Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee - Australia's relationship with China

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion to agree to refer the matter below to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee, which means it won't be referred to that Committee.

Reference text

That the following matter be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report by 26 November 2020:

Australia's relationship with the People’s Republic of China.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

11th Nov 2019, 5:50 PM – Senate Committees - Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee - Reference

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by SA Senator Rex Patrick (Centre Alliance), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the following matter be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report by the final sitting day of June 2020:

(1) That the Senate notes recent statements concerning Australia's relations with the People's Republic of China, including:

(a) the speech of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Payne, on 19 September 2019 in which she stated that in pursuing Australian diplomacy she will advance 'Australian values' and that 'at times that will mean speaking our mind or taking actions that seem disagreeable to others';

(b) the comments of Minister for Home Affairs, Mr Dutton, on 11 October 2019 that it is necessary to have a 'frank conversation' about China’s global influence: its Belt and Road Initiative, expansionism in the South China Sea and growing military and aid presence in the lndo-Pacific;

(c) Mr Dutton's further observations that the values, policies and actions of the Chinese Communist Party are 'inconsistent' with Australian democratic values and that 'We're not going to allow theft of intellectual property and we're not going to allow our government bodies or non-government bodies to be hacked into';

(d) the remarks of Prime Minister Scott Morrison, on 12 October 2019, that Mr Dutton's comments 'just simply reflect the fact we're two different countries' and that 'China will do what they do in their country, and we respect that too';

(e) the comments of the Minister for Resources and Northern Australia, Senator Canavan, on 13 October 2019 that Mr Dutton was 'just stating the facts of the matter' and that it is a 'longstanding fact' that Australia and China have different systems of government and political values;

(f) the statement of the Shadow Minister for Foreign Affairs, Senator Wong, on 14 October 2019 that she has made 'repeated requests' to the Minister for Foreign Affairs that relevant agencies, such as the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade, and the Office of National Intelligence, provide a detailed and comprehensive briefing for parliamentarians on Australia's relationship with China; and

(g) Senator Wong's statement on 24 October 2019 that the Minister for Foreign Affairs has written to the Opposition declining to provide the requested briefings.

(2) That the following matter be referred to the Foreign Affairs, Defence and Trade References Committee for inquiry and report by the final sitting day of June 2020: Australia's relations with the People's Republic of China, with particular reference to:

(a) the management of a mutually respectful and beneficial bilateral relationship between Australia and China;

(b) Australian and Chinese perspectives on, and interests in, regional and global security issues;

(c) trade, investment and infrastructure issues, including Australia's engagement with China's Belt and Road Initiative;

(d) educational and research cooperation;

(e) tourism, cultural exchanges and people-to-people ties;

(f) management of diplomatic and consular arrangements;

(g) dialogue on human rights issues;

(h) the roles of Australian institutions in Australia's relations with China, including, state and local governments, universities and other academic bodies, business and non-government organisations; and

(i) any related matters.

No Yes (strong) 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 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