How Andrew McLachlan voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should make laws and regulations that protect and conserve the health of the Great Barrier Reef for future generations

Division Andrew McLachlan Supporters vote Division outcome

27th Feb 2020, 12:31 PM – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Climate change

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Queensland Senator Larissa Waters (Greens), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the Great Barrier Reef supports approximately 64,000 jobs and generates $6 billion for the Australian economy annually,

(ii) approximately half of the shallow water coral of the Great Barrier Reef has been lost since 2016 due to successive coral bleaching incidents,

(iii) the Centre for Tourism and Regional Opportunities has reported a dramatic decline in domestic tourism since successive coral bleaching events,

(iv) in February 2020, Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority survey teams found significant bleaching at three reefs in the Shelburne Bay and Wuthathi region of the Great Barrier Reef,

(v) current National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Coral Reef Watch forecasts show a heightened risk of a mass bleaching events in the Great Barrier Reef in the coming weeks, and

(vi) climate change remains the greatest threat to the Great Barrier Reef; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to:

(i) implement a climate policy that accelerates actions to limit global warming to 1.5°C to protect the Great Barrier Reef and the jobs that it supports,

(ii) take all action necessary to properly protect the Great Barrier Reef and avoid the UNESCO World Heritage Committee needing to place the Great Barrier Reef on the World Heritage In Danger List, and

(iii) develop a clear plan to move Australia towards 100% clean energy, including a plan for a just transition for Australia's regional workforces so that regional economies can thrive and workers are protected.

No 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 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 10

*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 / 10 = 0.0%.

And then