How Sam Dastyari voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should increase investment in renewable energy technologies

Division Sam Dastyari Supporters vote Division outcome

12th Sep 2017, 4:12 PM – Senate Motions - Renewable Energy - Against target and subsidies

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Senator David Leyonhjelm, which means the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate agrees that—

(a) the renewable energy target should not continue beyond 2023;

(b) no scheme to subsidise renewable energy generation or mandate a particular market share for renewable energy generation should replace it; and

(c) renewable energy projects not already approved by the Clean Energy Regulator be ineligible to receive subsidies via renewable energy certificates.

No No 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).

absent Yes Passed by a small majority

15th Sep 2016, 11:35 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to pass the bill in the Senate. In parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a third time.

Since the bill's already passed in the House of Representatives, it will now become law.

What does this bill do?

This bill does a lot of work! It crosses eight different portfolios, from Education to the Treasury. Read more about it in the bills digest.

For example, the bill:

absent No Passed by a modest majority

15th Sep 2016, 10:27 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - in Committee - ARENA

Show detail
absent No Passed by a modest majority

15th Sep 2016, 9:25 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Second Reading - Agree to the main idea

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a second time. In other words, they agreed with the main idea of the bill and will now discuss it in more detail.

What does this bill do?

This bill does a lot of work! It crosses eight different portfolios, from Education to the Treasury. Read more about it in the bills digest.

For example, the bill:

absent No Passed by a modest majority

15th Sep 2016, 9:12 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Second Reading - ARENA funding

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters, which means it was unsuccessful.

Motion text

At the end of the motion, add:

, but the Senate condemns this bill for ripping $500 million from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency's clean energy innovation grants as a dangerous and irresponsible act of sabotage, especially in a climate emergency and global transition to clean energy, and because it leaves the Coalition and Labor parties with no meaningful plan to meet Australia's Renewable Energy Target and pollution reduction target agreed at the Paris climate conference.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

3rd May 2016, 4:02 PM – Senate Motions - Budget - Australian Renewable Energy Agency

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion that called for the Senate to resolve that funding for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) won't be reduced. The motion was introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters.

Wording of the motion

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) how well positioned Australia is to take advantage of the huge jobs and commercial opportunities from investing in research and development in clean energy technologies,

(ii) That the Australian Renewable Energy Agency (ARENA) is the institution that will enable us to be global leaders in clean technology innovation, and

(iii) That the 2014 Budget proposed $1.3 billion in cuts to ARENA for the financial years 2017-18 to 2021-22 which have so far been blocked but which have caused considerable uncertainty for ARENA; and

(b) resolves That the $1.5 billion of currently legislated funding for ARENA for the financial years 2016-17 to 2021-22 will not be reduced.

No Yes Not passed by a modest majority

17th Mar 2016, 12:39 PM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - Support a rapid transition to clean energy

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters. It called for the government to stop supporting new coal mining developments and start supporting a rapid transition to clean energy.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the Chief Scientist, Dr Alan Finkel, stated on the Australian Broadcasting Corporation's Q&A program that Australia is 'losing the battle' against global warming,

(ii) Professor Terry Hughes has told 'The Conversation' that Australia can either develop new coal mines or protect the Great Barrier Reef, but 'we can't possibly do both',

(iii) coral bleaching caused by global warming has already caused the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority to raise its bleaching alert to Level 2, and the United States' National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration has upgraded its Coral Reef Watch warning for the far northern Great Barrier Reef to Alert Level 2, the highest threat level, and

(iv) the mining and burning of coal is driving dangerous global warming which threatens the Great Barrier Reef; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to abandon its support for the Adani mega coal mine and Abbot Point coal port expansion, and support a rapid transition to 100 per cent clean energy as soon as possible, and at least 90 per cent clean energy by 2030.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

9th Sep 2015, 4:28 PM – Senate Motions - Newcastle City Council Investment Policies - Environmental investment

Show detail

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

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Newcastle City Council recently passed an update to its investment policies that notes the Council's preference for environmentally and socially responsible investment, and notes reports that this policy will see the Council shift its investments away from coal and fossil fuels,

(ii) the decision has been heavily criticised by the Minister for Industry and Science (Mr Macfarlane), despite warnings from scientists that Australia must act to stave off catastrophic climate change, and

(iii) an opinion poll conducted after the Council's decision found that only one in four Newcastle residents think investing in coal is financially safe; and

(b) congratulates the Newcastle City Council on updating its investment policy and joining councils across New South Wales, such as Lake Macquarie City Council, Willoughby Council, the City of Sydney, Marrickville Council, Leichhardt Council and Lismore City Council, in adopting policies regarding environmentally and socially responsible investment.

No Yes Not passed by a modest majority

23rd Jun 2015, 11:03 PM – Senate Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to pass the bill (in parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a third time).

Purpose of the bill

The bill amends the Commonwealth Renewable Energy Target (RET) scheme by, for example, reducing the large-scale renewable energy target (LRET) and replacing the requirement for two-yearly reviews of the operation of the RET scheme with annual statements by the Clean Energy Regulator (CER). Further detail is available in the bills digest.

Read more on ABC News.

absent No Passed by a modest majority

17th Jun 2015, 6:02 PM – Senate Renewable Energy (Electricity) Amendment Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Agree to the bill's main idea

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to agree with the bill's main idea (in parliamentary jargon, they voted to read the bill for a second time).

Main idea of the bill

The bill amends the Commonwealth Renewable Energy Target (RET) scheme by, for example, reducing the large-scale renewable energy target (LRET) and replacing the requirement for two-yearly reviews of the operation of the RET scheme with annual statements by the Clean Energy Regulator (CER). Further detail is available in the bills digest.

absent No Passed by a modest majority

28th Oct 2014, 4:07 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Acknowledge massive economic benefits

Show detail

The majority supported acknowledging "the massive economic benefits" of the black coal mining industry.

Wording of the motion

National Party Senator Barry O'Sullivan wanted the Senate to acknowledge:

the massive economic benefits delivered to this nation by the black coal industry and the importance it has for the employment fortunes of miners and other professionals in this nation, noting that Australia should maintain a diverse and sensible energy mix.

Background to the motion

Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Government has been criticised for being too in favour of coal mining at the expense of addressing climate change (for example, see ABC News).

absent No Passed by a modest majority

17th Jul 2014, 10:41 AM – Senate Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2014 — In Committee — Funding to ARENA

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion "that schedule 5 stand as printed", which means that the schedule will remain unchanged. This motion was put in response to an amendment to oppose that schedule, which was introduced by Greens Senator Christine Milne.

Schedule 5 amends the funding for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency ('ARENA').(Read more about this schedule in the explanatory memorandum. ) Senator Milne explained that "if the government's schedule stands, ARENA's funding would drop from just over a billion dollars down to $341 million".(Read Senator Milne's full explanation and the associated debate here, after 10.28 am. )

Background to the bills

The Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2014 and related bills were introduced to repeal the carbon pricing mechanism, which was introduced by the Australian Labor Party while in government. The Coalition described the mechanism as a “carbon tax” and removing it was a key policy platform during the 2013 election.(You can read more about the Coalition's policy to remove the carbon price here. )

The carbon pricing mechanism commenced on 1 July 2012.(For more information on the carbon pricing mechanism and how it works, please see the Clean Energy Regulator’s website. ) It is an emissions trading scheme that puts a price on carbon emissions. It applies to “liable entities” (a group that includes companies that emit a high level of greenhouse gases). Initially the price of carbon is fixed by the mechanism but from 1 July 2015 the price will be set by the market, though the Labor Government did announce plans to bring this forward to 1 July 2014 just before they were defeated by the Coalition in the 2013 election.

This is the third time that this package of bills have been introduced. The first time, they were rejected in the Senate during the third reading stage.(See that division here. ) The second time, they were rejected in the Senate during the committee stage.(See that division here. Read more about this second rejection of this package of bills on ABC News here or on the World Today here.)

The bills included in this package are the following:

No No Passed by a small majority

10th Jul 2014, 12:12 PM – Senate Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 [No. 2] - In Committee - Schedule 5

Show detail

This division relates to the Policy For a carbon price.

The majority voted against a motion "that schedule 5 stand as printed", which means that the majority opposed the schedule.

This motion was put in response to an earlier motion to oppose schedule 5 introduced by Greens Senator Christine Milne. Schedule 5 provides for a reduction in funding for the Australian Renewable Energy Agency.(Read more about schedule 5 in the bill's explanatory memorandum. )

Background to the bills

The Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 (No. 2) and related bills were introduced to remove the carbon pricing mechanism, which was introduced by the Australian Labor Party while in government. The Coalition described the mechanism as a “carbon tax” and removing it was a key policy platform during the 2013 election.(You can read more about the Coalition's policy to remove the carbon price here. )

The carbon pricing mechanism commenced on 1 July 2012.(For more information on the carbon pricing mechanism and how it works, please see the Clean Energy Regulator’s website. ) It is an emissions trading scheme that puts a price on carbon emissions. It applies to “liable entities” (a group that includes companies that emit a high level of greenhouse gases). Initially the price of carbon is fixed by the mechanism but from 1 July 2015 the price will be set by the market, though the Labor Government did announce plans to bring this forward to 1 July 2014 just before they were defeated by the Coalition in the 2013 election.

This is the second time that this package of bills has been introduced, after they were rejected in the Senate during the third reading stage the first time round.(See that division here. )

The other related bills that were introduced along with the Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2013 (No. 2) are:

The Clean Energy (Income Tax Rates and Other Amendments) Bill 2013 (No. 2) was previously rejected in the Senate at second reading stage.(See that division here.)

No No Not passed by a small majority

18th Jun 2014, 11:46 AM – Senate Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013 [No. 2] - Second Reading - Read a second time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bill for a third time.(Read more about the stages a bill must pass through here. ) This means that the majority reject the main idea of the bill and that it will no longer be considered.

Because this is the second time this bill has been rejected in the Senate (see below), it is potentially a trigger for a double dissolution. However, it is up to the Government to use it to call a full Senate and House of Representatives election.(Read more on ABC News here. )

Background to the bill

The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013 (No. 2) was introduced after the Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013 was rejected in the Senate last year.(See that division here.)

The bill has been introduced to abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation, which was created by the previous Labor Government with the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012. It is a fund dedicated to investing in renewable energy generation.

References

No No Not passed by a small majority

10th Dec 2013, 2:02 PM – Senate Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013 — Second Reading — Read a second time

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion that: the bill, as amended, now be read a second time.

This means that the majority of senators rejected the main idea of the bill, which was to abolish the Clean Energy Finance Corporation.

Background to the bill

The Clean Energy Finance Corporation was created by the Clean Energy Finance Corporation Bill 2012, which was introduced while the Australian Labor Party was in government. It is a fund dedicated to investing in renewable energy generation.

The Clean Energy Finance Corporation (Abolition) Bill 2013 was introduced into Parliament as part of a package of eleven bills to remove the carbon pricing mechanism and abolish both the Clean Energy Finance Corporation and the Climate Change Authority.(Read more about the Clean Energy Finance Corporation here and the Climate Change Authority here.)

The ten other bills are:

No No Not passed by a small majority

How "voted moderately 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 5 50 50
MP voted against policy 2 0 20
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 9 9 18
Total: 59 88

*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 = 59 / 88 = 67%.

And then