How Andrew McLachlan voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should support the Adani Group's plans to build the Carmichael mine in Queensland's Galilee Basin

Division Andrew McLachlan Supporters vote Division outcome

16th Jun 2020, 4:50 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Transition to renewables

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) since the Sydney Morning Herald and The Agereported on 11 June 2020 that international insurance companies Liberty Mutual, HDI-Talanx and Aspen Re were underwriting work on Adani's Carmichael coal mine, Liberty Mutual and HDI-Talanx have publicly stated that they will not provide future policies to the Adani Carmichael project, and Aspen Re is 'reviewing its underwriting appetite for fossil fuels',

(ii) existing coverage extends to early work only and Adani has still not secured insurance for the complete construction and operation of the Carmichael mine,

(iii) many major companies have refused to be involved in any part of the climate-wrecking project, including:

(A) at least sixteen global insurers, and

(B) at least sixty-five major insurance, construction, engineering, finance and haulage companies, and

(iv) in the ten years since this mine was announced, the Adani group has:

(A) misrepresented the number of jobs the Carmichael mine would create,

(B) illegally released contaminated water into protected wetlands and the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage area, and

(C) been criminally convicted in relation to giving false and misleading information to the Queensland regulator in relation to unlawful clearing activities; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to:

(i) recognise that the Adani Carmichael coal mine project is unviable and withdraw its support for the project,

(ii) ban all new thermal coal mining in the Galilee Basin and plan a just transition for workers in existing coal mines, and

(iii) invest in renewable energy projects that will actually create jobs without turbo-charging the climate crisis.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

10th Feb 2020, 7:37 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Revoke Adani environmental approvals

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) Adani Mining has received a criminal conviction in relation to giving false and misleading information to the regulator in relation to unlawful clearing activities, and

(ii) criminal convictions are a trigger under section 145 of the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 for review and revocation of approvals granted under that Act; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to revoke Adani's environmental approvals related to its Carmichael Coal mine.

No No (strong) Not passed by a large majority

How "voted very 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 1 50 50
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* 0 0 0
Total: 60 60

*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 = 60 / 60 = 100%.

And then