How Gerard Rennick voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should increase funding for university education

Division Gerard Rennick Supporters vote Division outcome

17th Oct 2019, 11:31 AM – Senate Emergency Response Fund (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2019 - in Committee - The Education Investment Fund

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion that schedule 2 of the Emergency Response Fund (Consequential Amendments) Bill 2019 stand as printed. In other words, they wanted to keep that schedule unchanged.

What is Schedule 2?

Schedule 2 abolishes the Education Investment Fund ("EIF"). According to the bills digest:

The EIF was established on 1 January 2009 by section 131 of the Nation-building Funds Act 2008 (NBF Act), to provide dedicated ongoing capital funding for tertiary education and research infrastructure, including for universities, vocational education and training providers and other non-university organisations.

The EIF was intended to provide a large-scale funding source for transformational projects which would allow Australian research and tertiary education institutions to compete effectively with international counterparts.

Unlike many other tertiary education infrastructure funding programs, the EIF was not limited to supporting research infrastructure, but instead funded a wide range of investments, including learning and teaching spaces.

Yes No (strong) 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 1 0 50
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 50

*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 / 50 = 0.0%.

And then