How Brett Mason voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should protect threatened forest and bushland habitats from logging.

Division Brett Mason Supporters vote Division outcome

25th Jun 2013, 3:59 PM – Senate Motions - Tasmanian Wilderness World Heritage Area - Prohibit logging

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to prohibit logging in Australia's World Heritage areas.

Motion wording

That the Senate—

(a) welcomes the World Heritage listing of the extension to Tasmania's Wilderness World Heritage area decided at the World Heritage Committee meeting of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] on 24 June 2013;

(b) supports the values of Australia's World Heritage listed areas and the provision of adequate funding to maintain their natural and cultural values; and

(c) supports a total prohibition on logging in any World Heritage areas in Australia, now and into the future.

No Yes (strong) Passed by a small majority

20th Jun 2013, 12:11 PM – Senate Motions - National Parks - Protect

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion to protect Australia's national parks, which was introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters.

Wording of the motion

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australians are outraged that our national parks are under threat from logging, grazing, shooting and tourism developments, and

(ii) it is too late to secure by regulation national protection for national parks in this parliamentary term; and

(b) calls on the Government to act on its promise to protect our national parks by amending the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 before this Parliament rises.

absent Yes (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

11th May 2010, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Environment: Millewa Forest - Stop logging

Show detail
absent Yes Not passed by a large majority

4th Dec 2008, 10:39 AM – Senate Motions - Koala Habitat - Protect Bermagui habitat

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion to protect koala habitat in the Bermagui region, which was introduced by Greens Senator Bob Brown.

Motion wording

That the Senate—

(a) welcomes the reported decision of the Minister for Climate Change and the Environment (Ms Tebbutt) to spend $1.23 million on a recovery plan for koalas, including revegetating koala habitat; and

(b) calls on the New South Wales Government to halt logging of any koala habitat forest including that in the Bermagui region on the state’s south coast.

absent Yes (strong) Not passed by a large majority

29th Nov 2006, 3:45 PM – Senate Motions - Logging in Tasmania’s Weld River Valley - Halt logging

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Bob Brown.

Wording of the motion

That the Senate calls for a halt to all logging destruction in Tasmania’s Weld River valley until and unless:

(a) the Government completes a World Heritage evaluation of the forests;

(b) the Tasmanian Government shows that there is no prudent or feasible option to that destruction;

(c) an independent evaluation of the valley’s long-term economic value, including its tourism potential and carbon sink value, has been completed; and

(d) the full loss of water, carbon, biodiversity and honey production value from the destruction proposed is known.

absent Yes (strong) Not passed by a large majority

28th Mar 2006, 3:52 PM – Senate Motions - Wedge-Tailed Eagle - Protect habitat

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion to alter the logging plans in north-east Tasmania in order to save the habitat of the endangered Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle.

Wording of the motion

That the Senate—

(a) notes a study by the University of Melbourne and Forestry Tasmania which estimates that the threat of extinction of the Tasmanian wedge-tailed eagle in north east Tasmania rises from 65 per cent to 99 per cent if current logging plans go ahead; and

(b) calls on the Commonwealth and Tasmanian Governments to address this finding by altering the proposed logging so that the eagle’s prospects of survival are improved rather than worsened.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a large majority

How "voted moderately 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 3 75 150
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* 1 1 2
Total: 76 252

*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 = 76 / 252 = 30%.

And then