How Jacqui Lambie voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should address the causes and consequences of climate change as a matter of urgency by, for example, lowering emissions and investing in science and technology

Division Jacqui Lambie Supporters vote Division outcome

28th Oct 2014, 4:07 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Acknowledge massive economic benefits

Show detail

The majority supported acknowledging "the massive economic benefits" of the black coal mining industry.

Wording of the motion

National Party Senator Barry O'Sullivan wanted the Senate to acknowledge:

the massive economic benefits delivered to this nation by the black coal industry and the importance it has for the employment fortunes of miners and other professionals in this nation, noting that Australia should maintain a diverse and sensible energy mix.

Background to the motion

Prime Minister Tony Abbott and his Government has been criticised for being too in favour of coal mining at the expense of addressing climate change (for example, see ABC News).

absent No Passed by a modest majority

22nd Sep 2014, 5:14 PM – Senate Matters of Urgency - Climate Change - Climate Change Summit and emissions reduction target

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion moved by Greens Senator Christine Milne, which was:

That, in the opinion of the Senate, the following is a matter of urgency:

"The need for the Prime minister to attend the United Nations Climate Summit 2014,(Read more about the UN Climate Summit 2014 on its website here. ) and to recognise that Australia's emissions reduction target is inadequate."

This means that the majority disagree with this motion and that it was rejected.

Background to the motion

The 2014 Climate Change Summit was announced by UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon in 2013 and takes place on 23 September 2014 in New York. It is a meeting on climate change with a focus on initiatives and actions. Secretary-General Ban invited leaders of governments, the private sector and civil society with the aim of these leaders using the Summit as a public platform.(Read more about the Summit on its website here.)

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

15th Jul 2014, 9:31 PM – Senate Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2014 and related bills - Second Reading - Protect from climate change

Show detail

This division relates to the Policy For a carbon price.

The majority voted against an amendment moved by Greens Senator Christine Milne, which would have amended the original motion "That these bills be now read a second time" with the following:

At the end of the motion, add:

but the Senate

(a) condemns this Bill and the related Bills;

(b) recognises that:

(i) the world is on track for 4 degrees of warming; and

(ii) warming of less than 1 degree is already intensifying extreme weather events in Australia and around the world with enormous costs to life and property;

(c) calls on the government to:

(i) protect the Australian people and environment from climate change by approving no new coal mines or extensions of existing mines, or new coal export terminals; and

(ii) adopt a trajectory of 40-60% below 2000 levels by 2030 and net carbon zero by 2050 emissions reduction target in global negotiations for a 2015 treaty.

Because the majority voted against this amendment, it was rejected.

Background to the bills

The Clean Energy Legislation (Carbon Tax Repeal) Bill 2014 and related bills were introduced to remove the carbon pricing mechanism, which was introduced by the Australian Labor Party while in government. The Coalition described the mechanism as a “carbon tax” and removing it was a key policy platform during the 2013 election.(You can read more about the Coalition's policy to remove the carbon price here. )

The carbon pricing mechanism commenced on 1 July 2012.(For more information on the carbon pricing mechanism and how it works, please see the Clean Energy Regulator’s website. ) It is an emissions trading scheme that puts a price on carbon emissions. It applies to “liable entities” (a group that includes companies that emit a high level of greenhouse gases). Initially the price of carbon is fixed by the mechanism but from 1 July 2015 the price will be set by the market, though the Labor Government did announce plans to bring this forward to 1 July 2014 just before they were defeated by the Coalition in the 2013 election.

This is the third time that this package of bills have been introduced. The first time, they were rejected in the Senate during the third reading stage.(See that division here. ) The second time, they were rejected in the Senate during the committee stage.(See that division here. Read more about this second rejection of this package of bills on ABC News here or on the World Today here.)

The bills included in this package are the following:

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a large majority

How "voted moderately 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 2 0 100
MP absent 2 50 100
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* 2 2 4
Total: 52 214

*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 = 52 / 214 = 24%.

And then