How Mark Furner voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should increase water allocations from the Murray-Darling Basin for farmers and other users

Division Mark Furner Supporters vote

7th Feb 2013, 12:38 PM – Senate Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Buyback cap

No Yes

6th Feb 2013, 12:44 PM – Senate Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Timeframe

No No

6th Feb 2013, 12:34 PM – Senate Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Up to 450 Gigalitres

No Yes

6th Feb 2013, 11:34 AM – Senate Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Socioeconomic outcomes

No Yes

6th Feb 2013, 10:44 AM – Senate Water Amendment (Water for the Environment Special Account) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Buybacks

No Yes

21st Nov 2012, 10:36 AM – Senate Water Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Protection of communities

No Yes

21st Nov 2012, 9:39 AM – Senate Water Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Modelling

No No

21st Nov 2012 – Senate Water Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Adjustments

No No (strong)

20th Nov 2012, 9:59 PM – Senate Water Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Adoption of amendments

No No (strong)

20th Nov 2012, 9:41 PM – Senate Water Amendment (Long-term Average Sustainable Diversion Limit Adjustment) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Ground water amendment

No No (strong)

20th Aug 2012, 3:42 PM – Senate Motions - Murray-Darling Basin - 4000 gigalitres required

No No

9th May 2012, 4:02 PM – Senate Motions - Murray-Darling Basin - Average annual inflows

No Yes

How "generally 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 3 150 150
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 3 30 30
MP voted against policy 6 0 60
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 180 240

*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 = 180 / 240 = 75%.

And then