How Jordon Steele-John voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should address the issue of foreign interference in Australia by, for example, introducing new offences against acts such as sabotage, treason and espionage

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for targeting foreign interference in Australia” which Jordon Steele-John could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Jordon Steele-John on this policy.

Division Jordon Steele-John Supporters vote

28th Jun 2018, 7:22 PM – Senate Foreign Influence Transparency Scheme Bill 2018 and another - Third Reading - Pass the bills

No Yes

28th Jun 2018, 10:21 AM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018 and another - Second Reading - Agree with bills' main idea

No Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for targeting foreign interference in Australia” which Jordon Steele-John could have attended.

Division Jordon Steele-John Supporters vote

4th Dec 2019, 4:09 PM – Senate Committees - Economics References Committee - Reference

Yes Yes

15th Aug 2018, 4:01 PM – Senate Motions - Confucius Institute - Foreign influence

Yes Yes

28th Jun 2018, 6:20 PM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2018 - in Committee - Support the new offence of sabotage

No Yes

27th Jun 2018, 9:51 AM – Senate National Security Legislation Amendment (Espionage and Foreign Interference) Bill 2017 and another - First Reading - Consider bills together

No Yes

How "voted almost always against" 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 0
MP voted against policy 0% 25 2
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 2
MP voted against policy 0% 5 2
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) = 10.0 / 70 = 14%.

And then this average agreement score