How Mary Fisher 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 Mary Fisher Supporters vote Division outcome

22nd Mar 2012, 1:56 PM – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Oppose offshore dumping

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters, what was:

That the Senate-

(a)   notes that:

(i)   a recent Galaxy poll found 88 per cent of Queenslanders oppose offshore dumping of dredge spoil in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area, and

(ii)   the Government has approved offshore dumping of over 22 million cubic metres of dredge spoil in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area in the past 5 years; and

(b)   calls on the Government to stop approving offshore dumping in the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

22nd Mar 2012, 1:53 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Moratorium on coal seam gas

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters, which was:

That the Senate-

(a)   notes that in the past 6 months since the Greens motion for a moratorium on coal seam gas mining was first defeated in the Senate, the urgent concerns of farmers, landholders and regional communities regarding the risks posed by the runaway coal seam gas industry have not been addressed;

(b)   notes that the recent Senate inquiry into the impacts of coal seam gas mining in the Murray Darling Basin heard compelling evidence that regional communities are suffering many negative impacts from the operations of coal seam gas mining companies; and

(c)   calls on the Government to implement an immediate moratorium on any new coal seam gas approvals until the long-term impacts of the industry on groundwater, agriculture, rural communities, threatened species, the climate and the Great Barrier Reef are known.

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

10th Nov 2011 – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Suspend applications and approvals until after UNESCO assessment

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters.

This means that the motion was not successful.

The motion was:

That the Senate-

(a)   notes:

(i)   that the Government and the Opposition did not support the Australian Greens' motion on 9 November 2011 that 'all applications and approvals made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 [the Act] which would have a significant impact on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area to be suspended until the conclusion of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization [UNESCO] requested strategic assessment, to allow consideration of all cumulative impacts of coal and coal seam gas ports and other developments on this internationally significant biodiversity icon',

(ii)   the comments by the Minister for Sustainability, Environment, Water, Population and Communities ( Mr Burke) on Four Corners on Monday, 7 November 2011, that he would 'prefer a situation where as much as possible is able to be dealt with once we've concluded the strategic assessment, but people have legal rights under law to commence the process and those processes continue in the interim', and

(iii)   the Act already provides a suspension process for applications and approvals in particular circumstances and a revocation process for approvals in particular circumstances, both without compensation rights flowing to the proponent; and

(b)   calls on the Government to:

(i)   confirm that sections 130(5), 132, 144 and 145 of the Act allow the Minister to suspend all applications and approvals made under the Act that would have a significant impact on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area until the conclusion of the UNESCO requested strategic assessment, and(Read more about the status of the Great Barrier Reef on UNESCO.)

(ii)   if necessary, urgently amend the Act to confer on the Minister the power to suspend all applications and approvals made under the Act that would have a significant impact on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area until the conclusion of the UNESCO requested strategic assessment, to allow that strategic assessment to properly consider all cumulative impacts of coal and coal seam gas ports and other developments on this internationally significant biodiversity icon.

References

No Yes Not passed by a modest majority

9th Nov 2011 – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Suspend applications and approvals until after UNESCO assessment

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters.

This means that the motion was not successful.

The motion was:

That the Senate calls for all applications and approvals made under the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 which would have a significant impact on the Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area to be suspended until the conclusion of the United Nations Education, Scientific and Cultural Organization requested strategic assessment, to allow consideration of all cumulative impacts of coal and coal seam gas ports and other developments on this internationally significant biodiversity icon.(Read more about the status of the Great Barrier Reef on UNESCO.)

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

13th Sep 2011 – Senate Motions - Coal Seam Gas - Moratorium on new coal seam gas approvals

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Larissa Waters. This means that the motion is rejected.

The motion was:

That the Senate calls on the Government to implement an immediate moratorium on any new coal seam gas approvals until the long-term impacts of the industry on our groundwater, agriculture, rural communities, threatened species, the climate and the Great Barrier Reef are known.(Read more about coal seam gas here.)

References

absent Yes Not passed by a modest majority

24th Jun 2008, 3:48 PM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - Act on conference conclusions

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion, so it was unsuccessful. It was introduced by Australian Democrats Senator Lyn Allison (Vic).

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that on 11 June and 12 June 2008 citizens and scientists came together in Canberra for the 2008 Manning Clark House Conference ‘Imagining the Real Life on a Greenhouse Earth’ [PDF, 1.2MB], in honour of former federal Minister, the Honourable Dr Barry Jones, AO, and concluded that:

(i) global warming is accelerating,

(ii) the Arctic summer sea ice is expected to melt entirely within the next 5 years, decades earlier than predicted in the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2007),

(iii) scientists judge the risks to humanity of dangerous global warming to be high,

(iv) the loss of the Great Barrier Reef now seems likely,

(v) extreme weather events, such as storm surges adding to rising sea levels and threatening coastal cities, will become more frequent,

(vi) there is a real danger that we have reached or will soon reach critical tipping points and the future will be taken out of our hands – the melting Arctic sea ice could be the first such tipping point,

(vii) beyond 2ºC of warming seems inevitable, unless greenhouse gas reduction targets are tightened, and we risk huge human and societal costs, and perhaps even the effective end of industrial civilisation,

(viii) we need to cease our assault on our own life support system and that of millions of species, and that global warming is only one of many symptoms of that assault,

(ix) peak oil, global warming and long-term sustainability pressures all require that we reduce energy needs and switch to renewable energy sources and many credible studies show that Australia can quickly and cost-effectively reduce greenhouse gas emissions through dramatic improvements in energy efficiency and by increasing Australia’s investment in solar, wind and other renewable sources,

(x) the need for action is extremely urgent and the window of opportunity for avoiding severe impacts is rapidly closing, yet the obstacles to change are not technical or economic, they are political and social, and

(xi) democratic societies have responded successfully to dire and immediate threats, as was demonstrated in World War II and this is a last call for an effective response to global warming;

(b) thanks the delegates of this conference, including Professor Barry Brook, Sir Hubert Wilkins, Dr Geoff Davies, Dr Andrew Glikson and Mr Sebastian Clark for their efforts in drawing this warning to the Senate’s attention; and

(c) urges the Government to act on these conclusions.

No Yes Not passed by a large majority

How "voted 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 2 0 20
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 4 4 8
Total: 4 28

*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 = 4 / 28 = 14%.

And then