Photo of Scott Ryan

Scott Ryan voted very strongly against extending government benefits to same-sex couples

How Scott Ryan voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should extend any financial and work-related entitlements and benefits that currently only apply to heterosexual couples to same-sex couples and their children

Division Scott Ryan Supporters vote Division outcome

15th Oct 2008, 10:03 AM – Senate Same-Sex Relationships (Equal Treatment in Commonwealth Laws - Superannuation) Bill 2008 - Second Reading - Remove discrimination

Show detail

The majority voted against an amendment introduced by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young, which means it failed.

Motion text

At the end of the motion, add

but the Senate:

(a) calls on the Government to introduce amendments to the Superannuation Industry (Supervision) Act 1993 to remove discrimination in the administration of private superannuation funds by mandating that where such funds recognises opposite-sex de facto couples they must also recognise same-sex de facto couples;

(b) recommends that the umbrella term ‘couple relationship’ be retained in this bill and also be extended to registered relationships in this bill and in similar legislation to ensure:

(i) equal treatment of same-sex and opposite-sex relationships for the payment of death benefits, and

(ii) that the courts do not treat married, registered or de facto couples differently, in that each would have unique criteria but be provided with equal ‘couple relationship’ entitlements; and

(c) recommends that the terms used to define parents and their children be simplified wherever possible in this and similar legislation to ‘parent’ and ‘child’, and applied consistently to ensure children across Australia are equitably included and the distinction between parents, co-parents and step-parents not be inappropriately or unnecessarily blurred.

 No Yes Not passed by a large majority

How "voted very strongly 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 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
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* 0 0 0
Total: 0 10

*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 = 0 / 10 = 0.0%.

And then