How Rachel Siewert voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should increase transparency requirements for political parties (for example, requiring full and prompt disclosure of any political donations on easy-to-search public websites)

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing political transparency” which Rachel Siewert could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Rachel Siewert on this policy.

Division Rachel Siewert Supporters vote

11th Mar 2009, 12:19 PM – Senate Commonwealth Electoral Amendment (Political Donations and Other Measures) Bill 2008 [2009] - Second Reading - Agree to the bill's main idea

Yes Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing political transparency” which Rachel Siewert could have attended.

Division Rachel Siewert Supporters vote

24th Feb 2020, 4:11 PM – Senate Motions - Parliament - Transparency

Yes Yes

12th Nov 2018, 3:49 PM – Senate Motions - Political Donations - Increase disclosure requirements

Yes Yes

16th Aug 2018, 12:06 PM – Senate Motions - Donations to Political Parties - Disclosure

Yes Yes

3rd Dec 2013 – Senate Motions - Political Donations - Disclosure and ban on overseas donations

Yes Yes

8th Feb 2007, 10:37 AM – Senate Motions - Government Accountability and Transparency - Canadian bill

Yes Yes

How "voted consistently for" 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 1
MP voted against policy 0% 25 0
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 5
MP voted against policy 0% 5 0
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) = 50.0 / 50 = 100%.

And then this average agreement score