How George Brandis voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should set up a review of parliamentary entitlements and allowances, including legitimate expenditure, salary packages, superannuation entitlements and other allowances

Division George Brandis Supporters vote Division outcome

16th Jun 2009, 4:17 PM – Senate Motions - Parliamentarians' Entitlements - Independent Parliamentary Standards Commissioner

Show detail

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

Motion text

That the Senate calls on the Rudd Government to establish an independent Parliamentary Standards Commissioner to give clear and independent advice on the legitimate expenditure of electorate allowance, and other allowances to members of parliament and to monitor and publicly report on the expenditure of the $32,000 per annum electorate allowance.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a large majority

6th Sep 2006, 4:01 PM – Senate Motions - Parliamentarians’ Entitlements - Review of remuneration and entitlements

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Australian Democrats Senator Andrew Murray.

Motion text

That the Senate requests that, in an appropriate examination or review that is undertaken of the remuneration and entitlements of members and senators, the Remuneration Tribunal take a holistic view with respect to members’ and senators’ salary packages and allowances, what they need to do their jobs, and their superannuation entitlements.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a large 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