Skip to content
Political Tracker

14 May 2009 · 10:34 AM · Division 3

Remuneration Tribunal Determination

Electorate allowance
Official title
Motions - Remuneration Tribunal Determination - Electorate allowance

Noes in the majority

This says only which side won the vote, because what Aye and No meant here depends on the exact question put in the chamber.

Aye
6
No
37
Not recorded voting
33

“Not recorded voting” is everyone eligible who isn't recorded as Aye or No, for example absent, paired, or presiding.

What was decided

The majority voted against a motion that opposed the rise in electorate allowance.

Senator Bob Brown introduced the motion and explained:

This motion is to disallow the regulation by which the members of parliament would get an extra $4,900 a year, or $90 a week, in electorate allowance.

He argued that this was a particularly bad time for an increase to the allowance due to the recession.

Motion text

That Part 3 (clauses 3.1 to 3.3) of Determination 2009/04: Remuneration and Allowances for Holders of Public Office; and Members of Parliament – Entitlements and Office Holders Additional Salary, made pursuant to subsections 7(1), 7(3) and 7(4) of the Remuneration Tribunal Act 1973, be disapproved.

Summary written by They Vote For You contributors. Read it with the debate

Policies this vote counts towards

How They Vote For You uses this vote when scoring members against each policy.

Votes by party

Both bars use the same scale: number of members.
Aye
7
No
38
Votes by party as a table
PartyAyeNo
Australian Labor Party018
Liberal Party015
Australian Greens50
National Party02
Country Liberal Party01
Deputy Senate President01
Family First Party10
Independent10
Senate President01

How each member voted

Aye · 7

No · 38

Spotted a mistake? Report a correction.