How Louise Pratt voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should take national action to increase housing affordability so that all Australians have the chance to buy their own home

Division Louise Pratt Supporters vote Division outcome

19th Jun 2018, 4:33 PM – Senate Motions - Social Housing - Reject charging market rates

Show detail

The majority supported a motion introduced by Greens Senator Lee Rhiannon also in the name of Labor Senator Doug Cameron, which means it succeeded. Motions like these don’t change the law by themselves but can be politically influential as they represent the political will of the Senate.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the latest census data indicates that there has been a 13 per cent rise in homelessness since 2011,

(ii) a well-functioning social housing system that is affordable for tenants is important in reducing homelessness,

(iii) charging tenants a proportion of income as rent, as opposed to market rent, has proved an effective way to ensure affordability, and

(iv) the Productivity Commission's report no. 85, Introducing Competition and Informed User Choice into Human Services: Reforms to Human Services, recommends state and territory governments charge new social housing tenant market rents; and

(b) calls on the Turnbull Government to reject the recommendation that state and territory governments charge social housing tenants market rates.

Yes Yes Passed by a small majority

11th Oct 2016, 4:00 PM – Senate Motions - Housing Affordability - Negative gearing & capital gains tax discount

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by NSW Senator Lee Rhiannon, which means it was unsuccessful.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australian dwellings increased in price by 10 per cent in 2015-16, indicating a clear national housing affordability crisis, with Sydney prices increasing by 13 per cent and Melbourne by 13.9 per cent, and

(ii) significant causes of these price increases include distortionary negative gearing and capital gains tax discount policies; and

(b) calls on the Federal Government to significantly reform negative gearing and the capital gains tax discount to ensure housing is more affordable for first home buyers.

Yes Yes Not passed by a small 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 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 2 20 20
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 20 20

*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 = 20 / 20 = 100%.

And then