Compare how Penny Wong and Barnaby Joyce voted on unconventional gas mining
Penny Wong
Australian Labor Party Senator for SA since July 2002
Barnaby Joyce
National Party Representative for New England since December 2017
How they voted compared with each other and someone who agrees that the federal government should allow companies to mine coal seam (CSG), tight and shale gas
Now this is where it gets a bit tricky… Two people might vote the same way on votes they both attended, so their votes are 100% in agreement. They might also have voted in a way we’d describe differently when looking at all of one person's votes. If the other person didn’t or couldn’t have attended those votes we leave those out of the comparison. Because that just wouldn’t be fair now, would it?
Most important divisions relevant to this policy
These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for unconventional gas mining” which either Penny Wong or Barnaby Joyce could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Penny Wong and Barnaby Joyce on this policy. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".
| Division | Penny Wong | Barnaby Joyce | Supporters vote |
|---|---|---|---|
25th Aug 2021, 4:32 PM – Senate Regulations and Determinations - Industry Research and Development (Beetaloo Cooperative Drilling Program) Instrument 2021 - Disallowance |
absent | - | No |
10th Sep 2012, 9:23 PM – Senate Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Amendment (Independent Expert Scientific Committee on Coal Seam Gas and Large Coal Mining Development) Bill 2012 - In Committee - Five-year moratorium |
absent | absent | No |
Other divisions relevant to this policy
These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for unconventional gas mining” which either Penny Wong or Barnaby Joyce could have attended. Where a person could not have attended a division because they were not a member of parliament at the time (or in the wrong house) it is marked as "-".