How Mehmet Tillem voted compared to someone who believes that The federal government should continue to fund the National School Chaplaincy Program (NSCP) to fund chaplains in Australian primary and secondary schools

Division Mehmet Tillem Supporters vote Division outcome

26th Jun 2014, 12:51 PM – Senate Motions - Youth Mental Health - Redirect chaplaincy funding to qualified mental health workers

Show detail

The majority disagreed with the Greens' motion that the government should redirect funding for the National School Chaplaincy Program from 2015 to qualified mental health workers.

Wording of the motion

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) the findings of the Youth Mental Health Report by Mission Australia and the Black Dog Institute, which states that 60 per cent of young people with a mental illness are not comfortable seeking information, advice or support from community agencies, online counselling or telephone hotlines, and

(ii) the judgement of the High Court in Williams v. Commonwealth of Australia (no. 2), which found the Commonwealth's National School Chaplaincy and Student Welfare Program to be unconstitutional; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to bring legislation before the Parliament supporting access to professional mental health support in schools by redirecting funding allocated to the National School Chaplaincy Program from 2015 to qualified mental health workers.

No No (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

How "voted very 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 1 50 50
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 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 50 50

*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 = 50 / 50 = 100%.

And then