How Sue Boyce voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should maintain or increase its investment in and support for the Australian coal industry

Division Sue Boyce Supporters vote Division outcome

15th Mar 2012, 12:12 PM – Senate Motions - Coal - From coal to clean energy market

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Christine Milne, which means the motion was unsuccessful.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) China's twelfth 5 year plan is expected to introduce caps on coal use from 2015,

(ii) the price of coking coal has already dropped some 40 per cent in the past year, due in large part to a drop in China's demand for imported coal,

(iii) China expects utility scale solar power to out-compete new coal-fired power stations by the end of the decade, while the Indian Government expects the cost crossover as soon as 2016,

(iv) India's economic giant, Tata Power, has publicly stated that its new investments will favour renewable energy, as coal power is becoming 'impossible' to develop,

(v) the Australian Bureau of Resource and Energy Economics (BREE) continues to predict that coal exports will double over the next two decades, and

(vi) Australia is leaving itself economically exposed by focusing on the development of coal export infrastructure; and

(b) calls on the Government to:

(i) require BREE to review its modelling based on the current geopolitics of coal, and

(ii) rethink Australia's economic settings, which assume ongoing increases in the coal export market, and instead look to broaden Australia's economic base and build a more competitive clean energy economy.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

10th Sep 2009, 9:41 AM – Senate Motions - Coal Exploration and Mining in the Galilee Basin - Concerns

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Tasmanian Greens Senator Bob Brown, which means the motion was unsuccessful.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) supports the protection of farming and conservation areas from coal exploration and mining and its effects in the Galilee Basin in Queensland;

(b) declares that it does not support the massive increase in coal exports flowing from the Galilee Basin through Abbot Point and Hay Point because of the climate change ramifications of burning more coal; and

(c) expresses concern about the potential impact of the industrialisation of Abbot Point on the Caley Valley wetlands and the endangered and vulnerable bird species that depend on that area.

absent No Not passed by a large majority

How "voted strongly 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 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 1 10 10
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 1 1 2
Total: 11 12

*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 = 11 / 12 = 92%.

And then