How Scott Ludlam voted compared to someone who believes that the federal government should increase funding for public transport within and between Australia's major urban centres and prioritise it over funding for private transport infrastructure projects

Division Scott Ludlam Supporters vote Division outcome

19th Apr 2016, 6:49 PM – Senate Motions - Public Transport - Prioritise funding

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Janet Rice (Vic), which means it was rejected.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the Turnbull Government is yet to commit funding to any major public transport projects in our urban centres,

(ii) the recent audit of East West Link federal funding showed significant flaws in the Liberal Government's approvals and funding decisions for that proposed project, and that there are strikingly similar features of the funding decisions for WestConnex and Perth Freight Link toll roads,

(iii) communities in Sydney, Perth and Melbourne are standing up and saying they do not want more polluting toll roads pushed through their urban neighbourhoods, and

(iv) investment in well designed public transport infrastructure is a more effective, economic, equitable and less polluting means of tackling congestion than new toll road projects; and

(b) calls on the Government to withdraw funding for WestConnex and the Perth Freight Link, and prioritise funding for public transport in our major urban centres before polluting toll roads that further embed car dependence in our cities.

Yes Yes (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

13th Oct 2015, 4:07 PM – Senate Motions — East West Link

Show detail

The Senate voted 32 to 30 against a motion by Janet Rice, Australian Greens Senator for Victoria. The motion primarily sought to call on the government to reallocate funding set aside for the East West Link to the Melbourne Metro Rail project.

The motion in its entirety was as follows:

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) Australia suffered a severe underfunding of public transport under the Abbott Government,

(ii) the former Prime Minister, Mr Abbott, labelled the 2014 Victorian election as a 'referendum on the East West Link', and that there was a change of government in Victoria because of that election, and

(iii) the Turnbull Government has this week [11 October to 17 October 2015] labelled the East West Link toll road as 'indispensable and inevitable', and included it in a publicly-released list of their priority infrastructure projects for Victoria; and

(b) calls on the Government to withdraw the allocation of federal funding set aside for East West Link and to reallocate this funding to the Melbourne Metro Rail project.

Yes Yes (strong) Not passed by a small majority

24th Nov 2014, 4:59 PM – Senate Motions - Westconnex - Don't construct WestConnex

Show detail

The majority disagreed that "the Federal and NSW Governments [should] abandon their plans to construct the WestConnex motorway and commit to building public transport in Sydney to minimise congestion, improve environmental sustainability and boost productivity" (see the motion).

Wording of the motion

That the Senate—

(a) notes that:

(i) the Federal Government has provided $1.5 billion in funding for the WestConnex motorway, plus an additional $2 billion in the form a concessional loan; and that this funding was awarded despite the lack of a detailed business case, including the assumptions behind the project's cost-benefit analysis, being made available to Infrastructure Australia or the public,

(ii) the WestConnex motorway, if built, will negatively impact residents and commuters across Sydney by increasing traffic congestion and air pollution; and the main beneficiaries of the project will be private businesses who will profit from new tolls while the public wears the financial risk, and

(iii) the Federal Government has not spent a single dollar on public transport projects in Sydney; and

(b) calls on the Federal and NSW Governments to abandon their plans to construct the WestConnex motorway and commit to building public transport in Sydney to minimise congestion, improve environmental sustainability and boost productivity.

Yes Yes (strong) Not passed by a large majority

24th Sep 2014, 4:03 PM – Senate Motions - East West Link - Redirect funding to public transport

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Janet Rice (Vic), which means it was rejected.

Motion text

That the Senate—

(a) notes:

(i) the recent release of the G20 finance ministers report on leading practices to promote and prioritise quality investment, particularly in infrastructure,

(ii) the emphasis this report places on rigorous, transparent and consistent infrastructure project preparation,

(iii) that this reflects priorities set out in the 2013 National Infrastructure Plan, which promotes public investment in public transport, and

(iv) that this raises concern that the $3 billion in federal funding committed toward the proposed East West Link project does not uphold the principles set out in these reports; and

(b) calls on the Government to redirect the $3 billion of Commonwealth funds allocated for the proposed East West Link to public transport in Victoria.

Yes Yes (strong) Not passed by a modest majority

12th May 2010, 4:09 PM – Senate Motions - High Speed Rail Network - Feasibility study

Show detail

The majority voted against a motion introduced by Greens Senator Bob Brown (Tas), which means it was unsuccessful.

Motion

That the Senate calls on the Government to commission a feasibility study into the staged construction of a high speed rail network on the east coast of Australia, which could deliver accessible fast, reliable, ecologically-sustainable long-distance transport.

Turnout

Only 46% of the Senate was present for this vote, meaning less than half of all Senators voted on this motion.

Yes Yes Not passed by a modest 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 4 200 200
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
MP absent 0 0 0
Less important votes (10 points)      
MP voted with policy 1 10 10
MP voted against policy 0 0 0
Less important absentees (2 points)      
MP absent* 0 0 0
Total: 210 210

*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 = 210 / 210 = 100%.

And then