How Linda Reynolds voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should allocate 0.7% of Gross National Income (GNI) to foreign aid in line with the United Nations' target

Division Linda Reynolds Supporters vote Division outcome

4th Dec 2019, 4:27 PM – Senate Motions - Budget: Foreign Aid - Increase

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by NSW Senator Mehreen Faruqi (Greens), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that the Federal Government has announced a review of Australia's foreign aid program;

(b) notes with concern that:

(i) Australia's foreign aid budget has been cut by 27% since its peak in 2012-13, and is well below the average for countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD),

(ii) the Liberal Government cut $117 million from the aid budget in 2019-20 – if current trends continue, Australia’s foreign aid program will be in the bottom third of all OECD countries by 2020-21,

(iii) Australia's current aid commitment stands at an abysmal 0.21% of Gross National Income (GNI), well below Australia's United Nations obligation of 0.7% of GNI,

(iv) aid programs in south and east Asia have been cut drastically, and

(v) the Liberals' budget cuts and political repurposing of aid to serve Australia's self-interest have decimated our foreign aid program;

(c) calls on the Federal Government to ensure the review is conducted independently and the findings are shared publicly; and

(d) calls on the Federal Government to:

(i) increase our foreign aid budget, and

(ii) use the review as an opportunity to reset their approach to foreign aid and put poverty reduction, climate resilience and social justice at the heart of our foreign aid program.

No Yes Not passed by a small majority

26th Nov 2018, 4:33 PM – Senate Motions - International Development Assistance - Increase aid budget

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Richard Di Natale (Vic), which means it failed.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) affirms that the best way to support our Pacific neighbours is through genuine aid and development funding and meaningful action on climate change;

(b) notes with deep concern that our aid budget is at the lowest levels it has ever been as a proportion of Gross National Income (GNI);

(c) is further concerned that both the Liberal and Labor parties have joined the debt-trap diplomacy bandwagon, and that Overseas Development Assistance loans often do not support good development outcomes and are at odds with Australia's aid policy; and

(d) as Prime Minister Morrison prepares to attend the APEC Leaders' Summit in Port Moresby on 17 November and 18 November 2018, calls on the Government to unequivocally support Australia's grant-based aid program and commit to reaching an aid budget of 0.7% of GNI by 2030, as per our international commitments.

No Yes (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

9th May 2017, 3:56 PM – Senate Motions - Military Unmanned Aerial Vehicles - Fund diplomatic network and aid

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means it failed.

The motion asked for the Government "not to purchase weaponised drones, and instead direct funding to strengthening Australia’s diplomatic network and increasing Australia’s aid budget from its current record low".

Full motion text

That the Senate—

(a) is deeply concerned that the Australian Defence Force (ADF) is reportedly planning to purchase weaponised drones;

(b) notes that:

(i) the Obama Administration is estimated to have killed at least 7 000 people with these lethal unpiloted aircraft during its term of government,

(ii) the Bureau of Investigative Journalists estimates that up to 1 168 civilians have been killed in United States (US) drone strikes in Yemen, Pakistan and Somalia alone,

(iii) due to the lack of transparency surrounding the US’s lethal drone program, and the practice of categorising unidentified people killed in strikes as enemies even if they were not the intended target, it is impossible to tally the exact number of civilian deaths, and

(iv) weaponised drone strikes exacerbate the very threat that the ADF is seeking to confront; and

(c) calls on the Australian Government not to purchase weaponised drones, and instead direct funding to strengthening Australia’s diplomatic network and increasing Australia’s aid budget from its current record low.

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 1 0 50
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 2 0 20
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 70

*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 / 70 = 0.0%.

And then