How Sue Boyce voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should use the wealth generated by mining for the benefit of Australian citizens, as encouraged by the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) Principles

Division Sue Boyce Supporters vote Division outcome

25th Mar 2014, 1:51 PM – Senate Minerals Resource Rent Tax Repeal and Other Measures Bill 2013 - Second Reading - Share mining boom benefits

Show detail

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by Greens Senator Christine Milne.

The amendment would have added the following to the end of the motion That this bill be now read a second time:

"but the Senate calls on the Government to recognise that the benefits of the mining boom should be enjoyed by all Australian society by:(Read more about mining in Australia here.)

(a) applying a 40% tax rate to all minerals,

(b) rebating only those royalties that were in place at July 2011, and

(c) allowing depreciation on the book value of the amounts actually spent on mining infrastructure only."

Background to the bill

The bill was first introduced into the House by Treasurer Joe Hockey to repeal the minerals resource rent tax ('MRRT'), which the Coalition called the “mining tax”.(You can read more about the MRRT here. ) The tax began 1 July 2012 and applies to profits earned from the extraction of mineral resources such as coal and iron ore. Its abolition was an election promise of the Coalition during the 2013 election campaign.(You can read the Coalition's policy here.)

The bill also repeals the schoolkids bonus, the income support bonus and the low income superannuation contribution.


absent Yes Not passed by a large majority

22nd Mar 2012, 1:29 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Use Queensland mining wealth to benefit all Queenslanders

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Queensland Greens Senator Larissa Waters. The motion asked that the proceeds of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax should benefit all Queenslanders and not just the mining industry.

Wording of the motion

That the Senate—

(a) notes a current report by The Australia Institute, which finds:

(i) the mining boom in Queensland is likely to destroy one non-mining job for every two mining jobs it creates, with the loss of at least 20 000 jobs should all 39 resource projects analysed proceed, and

(ii) the reality of the mining boom for the 99 per cent of Queenslanders who do not work in the mining industry is higher housing costs, higher mortgage interest rates and fewer jobs in tourism, manufacturing and agriculture,

(b) further notes the statements of the National Secretary of the CFMEU [Construction, Forestry, Mining and Energy Union] on 19 March 2012 to the effect that:

(i) the strength of the mining industry is driving up the Australian dollar to unprecedented levels and across the country Australia's manufacturing sector is under too much strain, and thousands of jobs are being lost in the finance sector too, and

(ii) Australians outside the mining industry are doing it tough because of the impact of the mining industry on the economy, causing a lot of unhappiness; and

(c) calls on the Government to:

(i) assess the real impacts of the mining boom on Queensland communities and the state's economy, and

(ii) reassess its decision to use proceeds of the Minerals Resource Rent Tax to fund infrastructure which will benefit the mining industry instead of benefiting Queenslanders through investment in initiatives such as national dental care, education funding, national disability insurance scheme, high speed rail and a sovereign wealth fund.

absent Yes (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

How "never voted" is worked out

Normally a person's votes count towards a score which is used to work out a simple phrase to summarise their position on a policy. However in this case Sue Boyce was absent during all divisions for this policy. So, it's impossible to say anything concrete other than that they have "never voted" on this policy.