How Brett Mason voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should support the Adani Group's plans to build the Carmichael mine in Queensland's Galilee Basin

Division Brett Mason Supporters vote Division outcome

25th Mar 2015, 5:25 PM – Senate Business - Great Barrier Reef - Galilee Basin

Show detail

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) the recent report of the Australian Coral Reef Society which stated that policies for a safe climate are inconsistent with the opening of new fossil fuel industries like the mega coal mines of the Galilee Basin, and

(ii) the comments of Professor Terry Hughes on ABC Radio that it is an impossible task to open up the mega coal mines of the Galilee Basin while sustaining the Great Barrier Reef for future generations; and

(b) agrees that Galilee Basin coal must stay in the ground in order to protect the Great Barrier Reef.

No No (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

2nd Mar 2015, 3:43 PM – Senate Motions - Abbot Point Coal Terminal - Transparency

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion that raised concern over media reports about a lack of transparency surrounding the Abbot Point coal terminal and the Adani Group. This means the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes recent media reporting which shows that Adani's ownership arrangements in relation to the Abbot Point coal terminal and proposed Carmichael coal mine lack transparency; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to urgently establish which individuals or corporate entities control the Abbot Point coal terminal and the Carmichael mine, whether all relevant disclosures have been made to the Minister for the Environment, and whether the environmental history of all persons or corporate entities involved has been appropriately considered.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

12th Feb 2015, 12:32 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Review control of Abbot Point coal terminal

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion that related to control of Abbot Point coal terminal in light of potential transparency issues reported by the media. This means that the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes recent media reporting which shows that Adani's ownership and taxation arrangements in relation to the Abbot Point coal terminal and proposed Carmichael coal mine lack transparency; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to urgently establish which individuals or corporate entities control the Abbot Point coal terminal and the Carmichael mine and whether all relevant disclosures have been made to Australian regulators.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

24th Nov 2014, 5:13 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Galilee Basin

Show detail

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the Queensland Premier, Mr Campbell Newman, has announced that he will use public money from the sale, or long term lease, of public assets to build a coal railway for mining magnates,

(ii) Premier Newman has already announced that public money will be used to pay for dredging in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area and dumping on the nationally significant Caley Valley wetlands near Abbot Point, and

(iii) Queensland's existing industries, our safety, our environment, including the Great Barrier Reef, and our very way of life are at risk from climate change which is driven by burning fossil fuels; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to rule out allowing federal public funds to be used to pay for coal mines, railways or coal ports associated with the Galilee Basin.

absent No Not passed by a modest 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 1 50 50
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: 71 72

*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 = 71 / 72 = 99%.

And then