How Slade Brockman voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal govenment should increase transparency in big business (that is, companies with an income equal or more than $100 million/year or, alternatively, $200 million/year) by making certain information public, including their total income and how much tax they paid

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for increasing transparency of big business by making information public” which Slade Brockman could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Slade Brockman on this policy.

Division Slade Brockman Supporters vote

9th Aug 2021, 8:45 PM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 - in Committee - Get rid of exemption to scrutiny

No Yes

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for increasing transparency of big business by making information public” which Slade Brockman could have attended.

Division Slade Brockman Supporters vote

2nd Sep 2021, 10:33 AM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 2) Bill 2021 - in Committee - Publication of COVID-19 payment info

No Yes

9th Aug 2021, 8:58 PM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

Yes No

9th Aug 2021, 8:51 PM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 - in Committee - Agree with bill as amended

Yes No

9th Aug 2021, 7:37 PM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2021 Measures No. 1) Bill 2021 - Second Reading - Agree with bill's main idea

Yes No

17th Jun 2020, 6:28 PM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2020 Measures No. 2) Bill 2020 - Consideration of House of Representatives Message - Do not insist on amendments

Yes No

17th Jun 2020, 11:23 AM – Senate Treasury Laws Amendment (2020 Measures No. 2) Bill 2020 - in Committee - Exemptions for large proprietary companies

No Yes

26th Nov 2018 – Senate Motions - Order for the Production of Documents

No Yes

25th Jun 2018, 12:19 PM – Senate Taxation Administration Amendment (Corporate Tax Entity Information) Bill 2017 - Third Reading - Pass the bill

No Yes

How "voted consistently against" 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 0
MP voted against policy 0% 25 1
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 0
MP voted against policy 0% 5 8
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) = 0.0 / 65 = 0%.

And then this average agreement score