How Slade Brockman voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should protect threatened forest and bushland habitats from logging.

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” 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
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting threatened forest and bushland habitats” which Slade Brockman could have attended.

Division Slade Brockman Supporters vote

15th Mar 2021, 5:03 PM – Senate Motions - Tasmania: Environmental Conservation - End privatisation

No Yes

24th Feb 2021, 4:14 PM – Senate Motions - Forestry - End native forest logging

No Yes

15th Feb 2021, 5:41 PM – Senate Motions - Forestry - Samuel Review

No Yes

15th Feb 2021, 5:36 PM – Senate Motions - Forestry - Environmental protection

No Yes

2nd Feb 2021, 4:17 PM – Senate Motions - White Rock Quarry - Halt expansion

No Yes

30th Nov 2020, 4:40 PM – Senate Motions - Environment - Protect Koala Habitat

No Yes

26th Aug 2020, 4:21 PM – Senate Motions - Victoria: Forestry - Protect old-growth and high conservation value forests

No Yes

15th Jun 2020, 4:32 PM – Senate Motions - Environmental Conservation: New South Wales - Convert to national park

No Yes

11th Jun 2020, 4:52 PM – Senate Motions - Forestry - Protect native forests

No Yes

13th Feb 2020, 12:11 PM – Senate Motions - Coal Seam Gas Mining - Protect Pilliga Forest & Great Artesian Basin

No Yes

12th Feb 2020, 4:30 PM – Senate Motions - Climate Change - Logging in the Tarkine

No Yes

4th Dec 2019, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Forestry - Victoria

Yes No

10th Sep 2019, 4:23 PM – Senate Motions - Endangered Species - Protect

No Yes

6th Dec 2018, 12:42 PM – Senate Motions - Halls Island - Make full assessment on World Heritage values

No Yes

4th Dec 2018, 4:50 PM – Senate Motions - United Nations Convention on Biological Diversity - Heed recommendations

No Yes

14th Feb 2018, 4:22 PM – Senate Motions - Tasmania: Environment - Tarkine

absent 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 0
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 0
MP voted against policy 0% 5 15
MP absent 50% 1 1

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) = 0.5 / 76 = 1%.

And then this average agreement score