How Rachel Siewert voted compared to someone who believes that people seeking asylum in Australia, who arrive without a visa and particularly those who arrive by boat, should be held offshore in an Australian territory like Christmas Island while their application is processed (See the policy "For regional processing of asylum seekers" for more on processing asylum claims in other countries, like Nauru)

Division Rachel Siewert Supporters vote Division outcome

28th Nov 2017 – Senate Motions - Immigration Detention - End offshore processing and detention

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Nick McKim, which "call[ed] on the Government to end offshore processing and detention, and bring to Australia every person who sought asylum in Australia and who is currently in Papua New Guinea and Nauru"

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) on 23 and 24 November 2017, Papua New Guinea police and immigration officials entered the Regional Processing Centre on Manus Island, with the Australian Federal Police playing an advisory role,

(ii) after three weeks of the refugees and people seeking asylum being starved and dehydrated, the Papua New Guinea police began the forcible removal of the men from the Regional Processing Centre,

(iii) this forcible removal included people being assaulted and beaten with metal rods,

(iv) the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) stated it had received reports that several men had been severely injured and medical treatment was paramount, and Mr Thomas Albrecht the UNHCR regional representative stated that "the situation still unfolding on Manus Island presents a grave risk of further deterioration, and of further damage to extremely vulnerable human beings",

(v) Médecins Sans Frontières (Doctors Without Borders) have taken ten people to hospital in the last 24 hours, and

(vi) the men on Manus Island, and the men, women and children on Nauru are Australia's responsibility and remain so; and

(b) calls on the Government to end offshore processing and detention, and bring to Australia every person who sought asylum in Australia and who is currently in Papua New Guinea and Nauru.

Yes No (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

25th Aug 2011 – Senate Motions - Immigration: MV Tampa - End offshore processing

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young. This means that the motion was rejected.

The motion was:

That the Senate-

(a)   notes that:

(i)   26 August 2011, marks the 10th anniversary of the rescue of 433 asylum seekers by the MV Tampa,(This rescue is known as the Tampa Affair.)

(ii)   this rescue was followed by the refusal of the Coalition Government to allow the ship to enter Australian shores in direct violation of both maritime conventions and human rights obligations,

(iii)   the majority of the asylum seekers, including children, were detained indefinitely on Nauru, as part of the Coalition's ' Pacific Solution', and

(iv)   10 years later, the Labor Government is still pursuing offshore processing, through Australia's agreement with Malaysia, and Australia's Memorandum of Understanding with Manus Island;

(b)   recognises a majority of Australians want asylum seekers processed on the mainland, according to The Age/Neilson poll published on 16 August 2011; and

(c)   calls on the Government to abandon offshore processing.

References

Yes No (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

25th Nov 2009, 4:05 PM – Senate Motions - Asylum Seekers - Stop excising territory

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Sarah Hanson-Young. This means that the motion was rejected.

The motion was:

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) the Federal Government’s ongoing commitment to continuing with the excised territories of Christmas Island, Cocos Islands and Ashmore Reef, and(Read about the Rudd government's decision to keep these islands outside of Australia's migration zone here. )

(ii) the sheer expense of running the offshore detention facility on Christmas Island;

(b) recognises concerns raised by the Australian Human Rights Commission, Amnesty International and the Refugee Council of Australia, to the limited access to sufficient health facilities, resources, and torture and trauma counselling services, due to the remoteness and isolation of the Christmas Island detention facilities from mainland Australia; and

(c) calls on the Government to end the policy of excision and bring all offshore arrivals to the mainland for processing.(Read more about the history of asylum in Australia, including offshore processing, here.)

References

Yes No 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 2 0 100
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 0 0 0
MP voted against policy 1 0 10
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 0 110

*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 / 110 = 0.0%.

And then