How Ursula Stephens voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should encourage Australian-based industry and secure the jobs these industries create by, for example, providing incentives for companies to stay in Australia

Division Ursula Stephens Supporters vote Division outcome

19th Jun 2014 – Senate Regulations and Determinations — Australian Meat and Live—stock Industry (Export of Live—stock to Egypt) Repeal Order 2014 — Disallow motion

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon. The motion was:

"That the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry (Export of Live-stock to Egypt) Repeal Order 2014, made under section 17 of the Australian Meat and Live-stock Industry Act 1997, be disallowed."

Senator Rhiannon explained that this Order "undoes the 2008 prohibition on exporting live sheep to Egypt" and should be disallowed because it "takes a backward step on the conditions that cover the handling of these animals in Egypt".(Read Senator Rhiannon's full explanation of her motion here.)

Because this motion was unsuccessful, the Order was not disallowed and remained in force.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

13th Nov 2013, 6:02 PM – Senate Matters of Urgency — Australian Automotive Industry - Government's failure to act

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion moved by Labor Senator Kim Carr on behalf of Labor Senator Claire Moore, which means that it was successful. The motion was:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency.

The failure of the Government to acknowledge the urgency of the crisis facing the Australian automotive industry, or act to avert it, and the anxiety this is causing for tens of thousands of Australian workers and their families about the future of the auto industry and their jobs.(Read more about this crisis here. )

This type of motion "is technically a vote on whether the matter is a matter of urgency ... [However, it] is often regarded ... as a vote on the substantive matter."(Read more about motions on whether something is a matter of urgency here.)

Yes Yes Passed by a small majority

6th Sep 2006, 4:14 PM – Senate Motions — Tasmanian Forestry Industry — Campaigns against Tasmanian forestry industry + Illegal timber imports

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of motion introduced by Labor Senator Kerry O'Brien, which means that it was successful. The motion related to forestry industry in Tasmania and condemned "the misrepresentation of Gunns Limited by the Rainforest Action Network which has been actively campaigning against Tasmania’s forest industry in its overseas markets, notably Japan". In particular the motion called for:

  • the Government to take urgent measures to address the dishonest campaigns and secondary boycott practices of environmental NGOs being used against the Tasmanian and the Australian forest and forest products industries in their Australian and international markets; and
  • the Government to move quickly and take urgent measures to prevent illegal timber imports into Australia from countries like Papua New Guinea and the Solomon Islands and provide a fair and level playing field for Tasmanian and Australian forest products in both their Australian and international markets.
Yes Yes Passed by a large 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 3 30 30
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 30 30

*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 = 30 / 30 = 100%.

And then