How Malcolm Roberts voted compared to someone who believes that in light of the threat of climate change, the federal government should make as rapid a transition to renewable energy as possible

Division Malcolm Roberts Supporters vote Division outcome

13th Sep 2017, 5:38 PM – Senate Motions - Energy - Transition for coal workforce required

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Richard Di Natale.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) considers coal-fired power stations in Australia will need to close in order to deal with climate change; and

(b) notes that the Government must have a plan for a managed transition of the workforce and to a clean energy future.

No Yes Not passed by a large majority

12th Sep 2017, 4:12 PM – Senate Motions - Renewable Energy - Against target and subsidies

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Senator David Leyonhjelm, which means the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate agrees that—

(a) the renewable energy target should not continue beyond 2023;

(b) no scheme to subsidise renewable energy generation or mandate a particular market share for renewable energy generation should replace it; and

(c) renewable energy projects not already approved by the Clean Energy Regulator be ineligible to receive subsidies via renewable energy certificates.

Yes No Not passed by a large majority

11th Sep 2017 – Senate Motions - Energy - Liddell power station

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Richard Di Natale, which means the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate supports the closure of the Liddell power station in 2022, as currently planned, and calls on the Government to:

(a) abandon any attempts to extend the life of this aging coal-fired power station;

(b) address any issues of security of supply through means identified by the Australian Energy Market Operator, such as dispatchable renewables, storage and demand management; and

(c) develop a plan for the orderly retirement of coal-fired power stations in Australia.

No Yes Not passed by a large majority

22nd Mar 2017, 5:05 PM – Senate Motions - Energy - Transition plan for coal workers

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to introduce a transition plan for coal workers, which was introduced by Greens Party Leader Senator Richard Di Natale. These motions have no legal force, but represent the will of the Senate.

Motions

That the Senate—

(a) notes that the Government has had no choice but to walk away from funding coal-fired power stations as they now look to invest in storage technologies to support the unstoppable potential of clean energy;

(b) acknowledges that thermal coal is in structural decline and has no long-term future in Australia; and

(c) urges the Government to implement a just transition plan for the benefit of coal workers, before it is too late.

No Yes Passed by a small majority

1st Dec 2016, 4:30 PM – Senate Motions - Coal Industry - For technology neutral policies

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by National Party Senator John Williams, which means it was unsuccessful.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) supports the 53 000 workers directly employed by the coal industry;

(b) recognises that the forced closure of coal–fired power stations would increase the living expenses of Australian families through increased electricity prices;

(c) acknowledges that the forced closure of coal–fired power stations would jeopardise Australia's energy security and put thousands of jobs at risk in our manufacturing sector which relies on access to cheap and affordable power;

(d) acknowledges that coal is an affordable, abundant and increasingly clean domestic energy resource that is vital to providing reliable low-cost electricity, and that it will continue to be integral to Australia; and

(e) supports technology neutral policies that deliver emission reduction targets.

Yes No Not passed by a small majority

15th Sep 2016, 9:12 PM – Senate Budget Savings (Omnibus) Bill 2016 - Second Reading - ARENA funding

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters, which means it was unsuccessful.

Motion text

At the end of the motion, add:

, but the Senate condemns this bill for ripping $500 million from the Australian Renewable Energy Agency's clean energy innovation grants as a dangerous and irresponsible act of sabotage, especially in a climate emergency and global transition to clean energy, and because it leaves the Coalition and Labor parties with no meaningful plan to meet Australia's Renewable Energy Target and pollution reduction target agreed at the Paris climate conference.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest 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 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 8 0 80
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 1 1 2
Total: 1 82

*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 = 1 / 82 = 1.2%.

And then