How Jordon Steele-John voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should implement the international conventions that relate to seeking refuge and protection from torture. These include the Convention relating to the Status of Refugees, the Protocol relating to the Status of Refugees and the non-refoulement provisions of the UN Convention Against Torture and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights

Division Jordon Steele-John Supporters vote Division outcome

17th Jun 2020, 4:13 PM – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - Resettlement

Show detail

The same number of senators voted for and against parts (c)(ii) and (d) of the motion, which means they failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) ...

(b) ...

(c) agrees that:

(i) ...

(ii) the indefinite detention of refugees, both offshore and onshore, causes trauma and harm to people who have applied for refugee status under the Convention Relating to the Status of Refugees; and

(d) calls on the Federal Government to immediately accept the kind offer from the New Zealand government to provide resettlement to 150 people each year from Australia's offshore detention cohort.

absent Yes Not passed

26th Nov 2018, 3:42 PM – Senate Motions - Universal Children's Day - Children in detention

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion introduced by Labor Senator Anne Urquhart (Tas), which means it succeeded. Motions like these don't make any legal changes on their own but are politically influential because they represent the will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) observes that 20 November 2018 is Universal Children's Day, commemorating the UN General Assembly's same-day adoption of the 1958 Declaration of the Rights of the Child, and the 1989 Convention on the Rights of the Child ('Children's Convention');

(b) acknowledges the work of UNICEF Australia and other stakeholders involved in the Australian Child Rights Taskforce's Children's Report and its recommendations;

(c) notes:

(i) that Australia's Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander children continue to experience disadvantage,

(ii) the report and recommendations of the Royal Commission into the Protection and Detention of Children in the Northern Territory,

(iii) that children in Australia face growing issues of intergenerational inequality,

(iv) that no child under Australia's care should suffer harm, and

(v) that refugee children under Australia's care have been languishing in indefinite detention on Nauru for over five years;

(d) invites the Morrison Government to take steps to improve Australia's adherence to the Children's Convention; and

(e) calls on the Morrison Government to accept New Zealand's resettlement offer and get the children off Nauru.

Yes Yes Passed by a small majority

13th Nov 2018, 6:33 PM – Senate Regulations and Determinations - Migration (Immi 18/019: Fast Track Applicant Class) Instrument 2018 - Disallow

Show detail

The majority voted in favour of a motion to disallow Migration (Immi 18/019: Fast Track Applicant Class) Instrument 2018, which was introduced by Greens Senator Nick McKim (Tas). This means that instrument will no longer have legal effect.

What does the instrument do?

Senator McKim explained that:

This motion seeks to disallow an instrument that the government is attempting to make which would expand the group of people who are subject to the fast-track application process for protection as refugees ... [T]he group of people that are currently classed as fast-track applicants had to arrive by boat without a valid visa between 13 August 2012 and 1 January 2014 and were not exiled to Manus Island or Nauru, provided that the minister has allowed them to apply for a protection visa and the person has made a valid application.


The instrument that we're seeking to disallow would, if it were not disallowed, apply the category of 'fast-track applicant' to people seeking asylum who arrived in Australia by boat before 2012, were assessed by the department as not engaging Australia's protection obligations and then challenged the department's assessments in the courts. Now what the government is seeking to do is to deny them the opportunity to fully explore challenges to the department's decision in the legal system. This is a significant denial of natural justice.

Read more about the instrument in its explanatory memorandum.

Yes Yes Passed by a small majority

16th Aug 2018, 12:12 PM – Senate Motions - Migration - New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Senator Cory Bernardi, which means it failed. Liberal Senator Ian MacDonald (Qld) crossed the floor to vote 'Yes' against the rest of his party.

Motion text

That the Senate:

(a) notes that the New York Declaration for Refugees and Migrants enables the United Nations General Assembly to work towards a global compact for migration, including an intergovernmental conference to occur later this year;

(b) further notes the comments attributed to the Minister for Home Affairs that Australia will not sign any migration compact in its current form, notwithstanding Australia's prior role in developing the agreement; and

(c) calls upon the Minister for Home Affairs, and other relevant ministers, to desist from taking any further steps towards Australia becoming a signatory to, or enacting, any elements of the global compact.

No No Not passed by a large majority

How "voted consistently 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 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 3 30 30
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 1 1 2
Total: 31 32

*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 = 31 / 32 = 97%.

And then