How Richard Colbeck voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should give the immigration minister the power to revoke the citizenship of people who have dual nationality (that is, are also citizens of another country) if they take part in certain terrorism-related offences

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for revoking citizenship of dual nationals involved with terrorism offences by the minister” which Richard Colbeck could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Richard Colbeck on this policy.

Division Richard Colbeck Supporters vote

1st Dec 2015, 9:01 PM – Senate Australian Citizenship Amendment (Allegiance to Australia) Bill 2015 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea

Yes Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for revoking citizenship of dual nationals involved with terrorism offences by the minister” which Richard Colbeck could have attended.

Division Richard Colbeck Supporters vote

3rd Sep 2020, 4:22 PM – Senate Australian Citizenship Amendment (Citizenship Cessation) Bill 2020 - Second Reading - Agree with the bill's main idea

Yes Yes

28th Feb 2006, 3:55 PM – Senate Motions - Australian Citizenship - Refusing and stripping citizenship

No Yes

How "voted almost always 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 1
MP voted against policy 0% 25 0
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 1
MP voted against policy 0% 5 1
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) = 30.0 / 35 = 86%.

And then this average agreement score