How Ron Boswell voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should deregulate Australia's wheat export market so that bulk wheat export is no longer done through a single exporter (which is known as a 'single desk' policy)

Division Ron Boswell Supporters vote Division outcome

19th Jun 2008, 8:46 PM – Senate Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008 and Wheat Export Marketing (Repeal and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008 - Third Reading - Read a third time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bills for a third time.(Read more about the stages that bills must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the bills have passed in the Senate.

The bills will now return to the House of Representatives so that they can consider the amendments agreed to in the Senate. If they agree, the bills can become law.

Although the bills had broad support from both sides of the Senate, there were two senators that voted against their respective parties. Liberal Senator Ross Lightfoot rebelled against the Liberal Party and voted 'no' against the bills while Nationals Senator Julian McGauran rebelled against the National Party and voted 'aye' in favour of the bills.(Read more about what it means to rebel in our FAQ Section. )

Background to the bills

Australia's wheat export market currently operates under a ' single desk' policy. This means that bulk wheat exports are directed through a single exporter of bulk wheat under the Australian Wheat Board International Limited (AWB International). The Export Wheat Commission manages the export of non-bulk wheat (that is, bagged or container wheat).

The bills establish a wheat export accreditation scheme, which will be regulated through a new statutory body called the Wheat Exports Australia.(Read more about the bills in their bills digests. The digest for the Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008 is available here (198 KB). The digest for the Wheat Export Marketing (Repeal and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008 is available here (53.1 KB).) This introduces competition into the bulk wheat export market. As explained by the explanatory memorandum, "[r]ather than forcing growers to sell their wheat through a single exporter they will be able to choose from a number of accredited exporters as well as domestic outlets."

References

No Yes (strong) Passed by a large majority

17th Jun 2008, 12:41 PM – Senate Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008 and Wheat Export Marketing (Repeal and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008 — Second Reading — Read a second time

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to read the bills for a second time.(Read more about the stages that bills must pass through to become law here. ) This means that the majority agree with the main idea of the bills and that they can now discuss them in more detail.

Although the bills had broad support from both sides of the Senate, the Nationals Party opposed them. The exception was Nationals MP Julian McGauran who rebelled against his party and voted 'aye' to the motion.(Read more about what it means to rebel in our FAQ Section. )

Background to the bills

Australia's wheat export market currently operates under a ' single desk' policy. This means that bulk wheat exports are directed through a single exporter of bulk wheat under the Australian Wheat Board International Limited (AWB International). The Export Wheat Commission manages the export of non-bulk wheat (that is, bagged or container wheat).

The bills establish a wheat export accreditation scheme, which will be regulated through a new statutory body called the Wheat Exports Australia.(Read more about the bills in their bills digests. The digest for the Wheat Export Marketing Bill 2008 is available here (198 KB). The digest for the Wheat Export Marketing (Repeal and Consequential Amendments) Bill 2008 is available here (53.1 KB).) This introduces competition into the bulk wheat export market. As explained by the explanatory memorandum, "[r]ather than forcing growers to sell their wheat through a single exporter they will be able to choose from a number of accredited exporters as well as domestic outlets."

References

No Yes (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 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