How Derryn Hinch voted compared to someone who believes that asylum seekers who arrive in Australia without a visa, particularly those who arrive by boat, should have their asylum claims processed regionally in a country such as the Republic of Nauru or Papua New Guinea (See the policy "For offshore processing of asylum seekers" for more on processing asylum seeker claims in Australian territories like Christmas Island)

Division Derryn Hinch Supporters vote Division outcome

15th Feb 2018, 11:56 AM – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - End offshore detention

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion, which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) on 13 February 2018, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) released an update on UNHCR observations from their latest mission to Manus Island,

(ii) UNHCR Regional Protection Officer, Mr Rico Salcedo, stated “What stood out the most from this mission at the time we were there, was a pervasive and worsening sense of despair among refugees and asylum seekers”,

(iii) the UNHCR further stated “We cannot emphasize enough that solutions must be found for all, outside of Papua New Guinea, as a matter of urgency. Australia remains ultimately responsible, as the state from which these refugees and asylum seekers have sought international protection, for their welfare and long-term settlement outside of Papua New Guinea”, and

(iv) there have been recent reports of deteriorating conditions on Nauru, and that refugees and people seeking asylum on Nauru are also the responsibility of Australia; and

(b) calls on the Government to end offshore detention, and evacuate to Australia every person who sought asylum in Australia and who is currently in Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

10th Aug 2017, 12:38 PM – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - Bring them to Australia

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion to have the asylum seekers that sought asylum in Australia - and that are currently in Papua New Guinea and Nauru - brought to Australia. This means the motion failed.

Motion text

That the Senate agrees that Australia's detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru are not safe and that every person who has sought asylum in Australia, and is currently in Papua New Guinea or Nauru, must be evacuated to Australia immediately.

No No Not passed by a large majority

20th Jun 2017, 4:00 PM – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - Close Nauru and Manus Is. detention centres

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion that called for the detention centres on Manus Island and Nauru to be closed and for all the asylum seekers there to be brought to Australia. The motion was introduced by Greens Senator Nick McKim (Tas).

Motions

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) 20 June 2017 is World Refugee Day,

(ii) currently there are men, women and children on Nauru and Manus Island who sought Australia's protection,

(iii) Department of Immigration and Border Protection statistics of 30 April 2017 show that:

(A) of the 1 015 Refugee Status Determinations on Manus Island, 711 were positive and 224 negative, and

(B) of the 1 209 Refugee Status Determinations on Nauru, 1 034 were positive and 175 negative, and

(iv) the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the human rights of migrants stated that: 'considering the incredible hardship that most of these asylum seekers and refugees have already endured in their countries of origin and in transit countries on their way to Australia, and considering that Australian authorities have been alerted to such serious issues by numerous reports from international organizations such as the United Nations and civil society organizations, Australia's responsibility for the physical and psychological damage suffered by these asylum seekers and refugees is clear and undeniable'; and

(b) calls on the Australian Government to close the camps on Manus Island and Nauru and bring every man, woman and child to Australia.

No No (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

29th Mar 2017 – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - End detention on Nauru and Manus Island

Show detail

The majority rejected a motion that called for an end to immigration detention on Nauru and Manus Island, which means it wasn't passed. The motion was introduced by Greens Senator Nick McKim (Tas).

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australia's offshore processing is a deliberately cruel policy that has created a humanitarian crisis,

(ii) men, women and children who have sought asylum have suffered immeasurable harm at Australia's hands, including death, psychological trauma and serious injuries,

(iii) the former UN Special Rapporteur on Torture, Mr Juan Mendez, concluded Australia had "violated the right of the asylum seekers, including children, to be free from torture or cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment",

(iv) Amnesty International says the Nauru detention centre was "explicitly designed to inflict incalculable damage on hundreds of women, men and children",

(v) indefinite offshore detention has led to global condemnation and a lowering of Australia's international standing,

(vi) despite the Manus Island processing centre being declared illegal by the Papua New Guinea Supreme Court in April 2016, the Australian Government has failed to resettle people in its care and forcibly deported an unknown number of people from Papua New Guinea,

(vii) the Department of Immigration and Border Protection says the cost of establishing and running offshore detention has exceeded $4.4 billion since 2013,

(viii) the Australian National Audit Office found that it costs $573,000 per person per year to keep people locked up in offshore detention,

(ix) despite the massive human and financial cost of this policy, that boats carrying people seeking asylum continue to attempt to reach Australia,

(x) many of these asylum seekers have been turned around to meet an unknown fate at sea or potentially refouled, contrary to Australia's international legal and moral obligations, and

(xi) despite the Australian Government's so-called "deal" with the United States, no one has been resettled in that country; and

(b) calls on the Government to end offshore detention, and bring every man woman and child, detained on Papua New Guinea and Nauru, to Australia.

No No (strong) Not passed by a large majority

12th Sep 2016, 4:48 PM – Senate Committees - Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee - Nauru & Manus Island centres

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion, which means it was successful. Motions like this don't have legal force but demonstrate the opinion of the Senate.

Motion text

(1) That the following matter be referred to the Legal and Constitutional Affairs References Committee for inquiry and report by the last sitting day in March 2017:

The serious allegations of abuse, self-harm and neglect of asylum seekers in relation to the Nauru Regional Processing Centre, and any like allegations in relation to the Manus Regional Processing Centre, with particular reference to:

(a) the factors that have contributed to the abuse and self-harm alleged to have occurred;

(b) how notifications of abuse and self-harm are investigated;

(c) the obligations of the Commonwealth Government and contractors relating to the treatment of asylum seekers, including the provision of support, capability and capacity building to local authorities;

(d) the provision of support services for asylum seekers who have been alleged or been found to have been subject to abuse, neglect or self-harm in the centres or within the community;

(e) the role an independent children’s advocate could play in ensuring the rights and interests of unaccompanied minors are protected,

(f) the effect of Part 6 of the Australian Border Force Act 2015;

(g) attempts by the Commonwealth Government to negotiate third country resettlement of asylum seekers and refugees;

(h) additional measures that could be implemented to expedite third country resettlement of asylum seekers and refugees within the centres; and

(i) any other related matters.

(2) That the committee be granted access to all inquiry submissions and documents of the preceding committee relating to its inquiry into the conditions and treatment of asylum seekers and refugees at the regional processing centres in the Republic of Nauru and Papua New Guinea.

Yes No Passed by a small majority

How "voted 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 2 100 100
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 2 20 20
MP voted against policy 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 120 130

*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 = 120 / 130 = 92%.

And then