How Louise Pratt voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should support the exportation of uranium from Australia

Division Louise Pratt Supporters vote Division outcome

13th Mar 2013, 3:58 PM – Senate Motions — Uranium Exports - Review all bilateral uranium supply arrangements

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australian uranium is confirmed to have been present in each of the reactors at the Fukushima Daiichi Nuclear power station on 11 March 2011,

(ii) the disaster is ongoing 2 years later, with continuing radiation leaks, and that 160 000 people remain displaced from their homes with inadequate compensation to resettle,

(iii) decommissioning is expected to take over 40 years at a cost of A$100 billion, and

(iv) approximately 2 000 samples of food and game tested for radiation between April 2012 and January 2013 exceeded the limit for human consumption of radioactive isotopes; and

(b) calls on the Australian Government to undertake an immediate review of all bilateral uranium supply arrangements to assess the risk of future disasters at nuclear power stations in countries to which Australia supplies uranium.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

22nd Mar 2012, 1:46 PM – Senate Motions — Nuclear Energy - India and other countries standing outside the NPT

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it has been rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) that a crackdown by over 6 000 police on non-violent anti-nuclear power protestors, including arrests for sedition and the prohibition on people congregating, occurred at the construction site of a nuclear reactor near the fishing village of Koodankulam in south India on 19 March and 20 March 2012,

(ii) that 20 000 people gathered on 20 March 2012 with thousands on an indefinite hunger strike until the non-violent protestors are released,

(iii) a growing mass movement in India opposed to nuclear power includes protests in Jaitapur, Maharashtra and Gorakhpur, Haryana,

(iv) the sale of uranium to India while that country refuses to sign the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) would be illegal under the Treaty of Rarotonga, signed by the Australian Government in 1985,

(v) the 1998 United National Security Council resolution 1172 'encourages all States to prevent the export of equipment, materials or technology that could in any way assist programmes in India or Pakistan for nuclear weapons or for ballistic missiles capable of delivering such weapons, and welcomes national policies adopted and declared in this respect', and

(vi) the Nuclear Security Summit will be held on 26 March and 27 March 2012 in South Korea; and

(b) calls on the Government to utilise all diplomatic channels to:

(i) protest the Indian Government's unprecedented deployment of police around Koodankulam and the harassment of peaceful protestors as inconsistent with the democratic right to peaceful protest,

(ii) caution the Indian Government against loading uranium fuel rods into the reactor at Koodankulam without conducting any safety or evacuation drills, mandatory exercises under the Indian Atomic Energy Regulatory Board rules,

(iii) promote the independence of nuclear regulators from industry and government as best international practice, and

(iv) not sell uranium to countries that stand outside the NPT and its associated safeguards system.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

23rd Nov 2011 – Senate Motions — Uranium Exports - For export of uranium to India

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Liberal Senator Eric Abetz, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes the Howard Government's 2007 decision to sell uranium to India subject to appropriate bilateral and international safeguards;

(b) calls on the Australian Labor Party National Conference to approve the sale of Australian uranium to India;

(c) looks forwards to the improved trade and security relations with India which will flow from this initiative;

(d) recognises the positive contribution nuclear energy makes to reducing greenhouse emissions; and

(e) rejects the view that alternative technologies can provide a comparable low emissions baseload energy source for India.

No Yes Not passed by a small majority

31st Oct 2011 – Senate Motions — Nuclear Nonproliferation - Identify countries that won't sell to

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) congratulates the Government for maintaining Australia's longstanding policy of predicating bilateral nuclear cooperation agreements on the condition of membership to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons; and

(b) calls on the Government to identify the countries to which it will not permit the sale of uranium.

No No Not passed by a modest majority

12th Nov 2008, 3:51 PM – Senate Motions — Uranium Exports — Take into account public opinion and the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties report

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Scott Ludlam, which means that it was rejected. The motion was:

That the Senate-

(a) notes the uranium study conducted by NewsPoll for the Australian Conservation Foundation over the weekend of 1 November and 2 November 2008, which shows that:

(i) Australians are 2:1 against uranium exports to countries with nuclear weapons,

(ii) 40 per cent of Australians are against the export of Australian uranium to any country for use in nuclear power plants for electricity generation,

(iii) a majority of Australians in every state are opposed to uranium exports to countries with nuclear weapons or against any uranium exports at all, and

(iv) results show 48 per cent of women are against uranium exports to any country, and a total of 73 per cent of women are against uranium exports to countries with nuclear weapons that have signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; and

(b) calls on the Government to take this strong indication of public opinion into account as it makes a decision on the clear recommendations provided by the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties on the Australia-Russia uranium agreement signed by former Prime Minister Howard and the then President Putin in 2007.(You can read the Joint Standing Committee on Treaties' report here.)

References

No No Not passed by a large majority

How "voted moderately 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 4 40 40
MP voted against policy 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 40 50

*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 = 40 / 50 = 80%.

And then