Catryna Bilyk voted consistently for a referendum on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice
How Catryna Bilyk voted compared to someone who agrees that there should be a referendum on the question of whether the Constitution should be amended to include a requirement for an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to federal parliament, such as that envisaged by the Uluru Statement from the Heart
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for a referendum on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice” which Catryna Bilyk could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Catryna Bilyk on this policy.
| Division | Catryna Bilyk | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|
19th Jun 2023, 11:11 AM – Senate Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023 - Third Reading - Pass the bill |
Yes | Yes |
16th Jun 2023, 6:34 PM – Senate Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea |
Yes | Yes |
16th Jun 2023, 4:13 AM – Senate Constitution Alteration (Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice) 2023 - in Committee - Agree with the bill |
Yes | Yes |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for a referendum on the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice” which Catryna Bilyk could have attended.
| Division | Catryna Bilyk | Supporters vote | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no votes listed | ||||||
How "voted consistently for" is worked out
They Vote For You gives each vote a score based on whether the MP voted in agreement with the policy or not. These scores are then averaged with a weighting across all votes that the MP could have voted on relevant to the policy. The overall average score is then converted to a simple english language phrase based on the range of values it's within.
When an MP votes in agreement with a policy the vote is scored as 100%. When they vote against the policy it is scored as 0% and when they are absent it is scored half way between the two at 50%. The half way point effectively says "we don't know whether they are for or against this policy".
The overall agreement score for the policy is worked out by a weighted average of the scores for each vote. The weighting has been chosen so that the most important votes have a weighting 5 times that of the less important votes. Also, absent votes on less important votes are weighted 5 times less again to not penalise MPs for not attending the less important votes. Pressure of other work means MPs or Senators are not always available to vote – it does not always mean they've abstained.
| Type of vote | Agreement score (s) | Weight (w) | No of votes (n) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Most important votes | MP voted with policy | 100% | 25 | 3 |
| MP voted against policy | 0% | 25 | 0 | |
| MP absent | 50% | 25 | 0 | |
| Less important votes | MP voted with policy | 100% | 5 | 0 |
| MP voted against policy | 0% | 5 | 0 | |
| MP absent | 50% | 1 | 0 | |
The final agreement score is a weighted average (weighted arithmetic mean) of the scores of the individual votes.
Average agreement score = sum(n×w×s) / sum(n×w) = 75.0 / 75 = 100%.
And then this average agreement score
- between 95% and 100% becomes "voted consistently for"
- between 85% and 95% becomes "voted almost always for"
- between 60% and 85% becomes "voted generally for"
- between 40% and 60% becomes "voted a mixture of for and against"
- between 15% and 40% becomes "voted generally against"
- between 5% and 15% becomes "voted almost always against"
- between 0% and 5% becomes "voted consistently against"