How Sean Edwards voted compared to someone who agrees that the federal government should make laws and regulations that protect and conserve the health of the Great Barrier Reef for future generations

Most important divisions relevant to this policy

These are the most important divisions related to the policy “for protecting the Great Barrier Reef” which Sean Edwards could have attended. They are weighted much more strongly than other divisions when calculating the position of Sean Edwards on this policy.

Division Sean Edwards Supporters vote
no votes listed

Other divisions relevant to this policy

These are less important divisions which are related to the policy “for protecting the Great Barrier Reef” which Sean Edwards could have attended.

Division Sean Edwards Supporters vote

25th Mar 2015, 5:25 PM – Senate Business - Great Barrier Reef - Galilee Basin

No Yes

24th Nov 2014, 5:13 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Galilee Basin

No Yes

13th Nov 2013, 4:08 PM – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Reject the Abbot Point coal port expansion proposal

No Yes

17th Jun 2013, 3:57 PM – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef World Heritage Area - Maintain heritage status

No Yes

29th Oct 2012, 3:45 PM – Senate Motions - Nationally Threatened Species and Wilderness Areas - Federal responsibility

absent Yes

10th Oct 2012, 3:55 PM – Senate Documents - Reef Rescue Program - Great Barrier Reef

No Yes

11th Sep 2012, 4:02 PM – Senate Documents - Great Barrier Reef - Federal responsibility

absent Yes

22nd Mar 2012, 1:56 PM – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Oppose offshore dumping

No Yes

22nd Mar 2012, 1:53 PM – Senate Motions - Mining - Moratorium on coal seam gas

No Yes

10th Nov 2011 – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Suspend applications and approvals until after UNESCO assessment

No Yes

9th Nov 2011 – Senate Motions - Great Barrier Reef - Suspend applications and approvals until after UNESCO assessment

absent Yes

13th Sep 2011 – Senate Motions - Coal Seam Gas - Moratorium on new coal seam gas approvals

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 0
MP absent 50% 25 0
Less important votes MP voted with policy 100% 5 0
MP voted against policy 0% 5 9
MP absent 50% 1 3

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) = 1.5 / 48 = 3%.

And then this average agreement score