
The Coalition has attacked the teals for voting with the Greens in parliament. What does the data show?
Many ads zero in on the teals' voting record in parliament, and some highlight this News Corp article, headlined 'Teals ally with 'radical, extremist' Greens', which cites Parliamentary Library research to claim that seven teal MPs voted with the Greens 'between 73 and 81 per cent of the time' over a period of more than two years.
But the Coalition campaign is based on only a portion of the parliamentary voting data and does not show the complete picture.
It does not answer key questions, including: are teals more or less likely to vote with the Coalition than other independents? What is their voting record on votes that a Coalition MP has called for? And do Coalition MPs vote with the teals on teal-introduced motions? These are the kind of questions voters living in teal-held or tightly contested seats may want answered.
So Guardian Australia has carried out a comprehensive analysis of how the crossbench voted in the 47th parliament.
First, let's get some things clear. The term 'teal' refers to the independents who ran in previously Liberal-voting seats in 2022 but who differ from the Liberals on climate change and the need for a strong federal anti-corruption agency. The teals have some commonality with community independents or independents involved with 'voices-of' type campaigns.
The teals are not a party. If you're interested in whether or not they vote like a party, this analysis by Patrick Leslie, a political scientist at the Australian National University, is excellent.
For this analysis, two independents who were formerly in the Liberal party – Russell Broadbent and Ian Goodenough – will be excluded, as both were Liberals for the majority of the 47th parliament.
I've compared the votes on every division (a division is a vote on legislation or procedural matters) held in the House of Representatives during the 47th parliament.
On each vote I assigned the major parties (including the Greens) a single position – aye or no – depending on the majority position of party members. I then take each of the crossbenchers, including Bob Katter from Katter's Australia party and Rebekha Sharkie from the Centre Alliance, and checked the agreement between each politician and party on votes where each pair were present. Finally, a total agreement percentage was calculated.
You can see the results in the following heatmap. Darker shades indicate lower agreement and lighter shades indicate greater agreement. The heatmap is sorted by voting agreement with the Coalition (but you can re-sort for any of the other parties and politicians by clicking their headings).
So yes, it's true that the teals mostly don't vote with the Coalition and have a higher voting agreement score with the Greens.
However, at least some teals are likely to be better allies for the Coalition in the parliament than for Labor.
If we take Labor's voting agreement score with the Coalition of 36% as a benchmark, there are two teals who are above this or tied.
Allegra Spender, in the Sydney seat of Wentworth, has a higher voting agreement score with the Coalition at 39%; and Kate Chaney, from the seat of Curtin in Western Australia, is tied with Labor at 36%.
But what if we look only at votes on divisions moved by Coalition politicians?
There are five teal independents who voted with the Coalition 50% of the time or more. And all the crossbenchers voted with the Coalition on Coalition-moved divisions much more frequently than Labor did.
So, despite Peter Dutton only naming one teal in his list of potential allies in a hung parliament scenario, the evidence shows teal independents vote with the Coalition's divisions at a decent rate – they just don't vote with the Coalition so much overall.
While the independent crossbenchers support divisions moved by major party MPs a decent amount of the time, the data shows the major parties do not return the favour.
A stark divide can be seen when you look at the voting pattern on divisions moved by independents.
The agreement score between Labor and the Coalition, which is at 36% for all votes, shoots up to 83%, and the parliament becomes divided, with the two major parties on one side and the Greens and independents on the other. That is to say, the two major parties often vote together against motions from the crossbenchers.
You can explore voting agreement between the parties and crossbenchers in this next chart, including filters for division types and, when the division relates to legislation, the portfolio of the legislation it relates to.
My analysis uses vote records sourced from the Australian Parliament House's (APH) divisions API and website. I merged information from several APH sources to combine the division with the mover of the division, the mover's party, whether or not the division related to a bill, or was otherwise classified as procedural, and, if it related to a bill, the portfolio of the bill.
You can see and reuse the data here. I also cross-checked with data from the theyvoteforyou.org.au API and Pat Leslie's data here (also from the APH API).

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
‘Beyond comprehension' for Israel to claim there is no starvation crisis in Gaza, Australia PM says
Anthony Albanese says it is 'beyond comprehension' that Israel's prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and the country's embassy in Canberra have claimed there is no starvation crisis in Gaza. Australia's prime minister also raised concerns about Israel restricting journalists from visiting the besieged Palestinian territory. It comes as the Greens party mounts a parliamentary push for the government to level further sanctions on members of the Israeli government. Albanese criticised the claims from the Israeli government in comments to the Labor caucus room this morning. He referred to comments from Netanyahu, reported overseas, as well as reports from Australian media outlets about comments from the deputy Israeli ambassador, Amir Meron. Sign up: AU Breaking News email Meron reportedly told journalists in a briefing on Monday, to which Guardian Australia was not invited, that Israel believed photos of starving Palestinians were 'false pictures' from a 'false campaign that is being [led] by Hamas'. 'We don't recognise any famine or any starvation in the Gaza Strip,' Meron reportedly said. In comments to the Labor party meeting on Tuesday, Albanese referred to such claims as 'beyond comprehension'. Albanese also told the party room that while there should be a 'caveat' on any health information shared by Hamas, he noted that Israel had blocked many journalists from entering Gaza to report first-hand on the conflict and the humanitarian situation on the ground. The Israeli embassy in Canberra was contacted for comment. Albanese's comments came days after he accused Israel of breaching international law in restricting aid deliveries into Gaza. 'Quite clearly it is a breach of international law to stop food being delivered which was a decision that Israel made in March,' Albanese told the ABC's Insiders program on Sunday. Dozens of Palestinians have died of hunger in recent weeks in a crisis attributed by the UN and other humanitarian organisations to Israel's blockade of almost all aid into the territory. Two leading human rights organisations based in Israel, B'Tselem and Physicians for Human Rights, said on Monday that Israel is committing genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. The US president, Donald Trump, told Israel to allow 'every ounce of food' into Gaza, saying there is 'real starvation' in the region. Trump, in a press conference with the British prime minister, Keir Starmer, said: 'Those children look very hungry … That's real starvation; I see it and you can't fake that.' Coalition senator James Paterson told Sky News he was concerned about the 'very dire' humanitarian situation in Gaza, and that Israel faced losing international support over its stance. Sign up to Breaking News Australia Get the most important news as it breaks after newsletter promotion 'Although I'm a strong supporter of Israel and I strongly support their campaign to dismantle Hamas and free the 50 hostages or bodies of deceased hostages that Hamas is still holding, I also accept that as the military power in the region which has effective control of Gaza, Israel does have a responsibility to ensure that the civilian population is fed, and they need to do all reasonable steps to make sure that that's the case,' he said. 'It is doing harm, in my judgment, to Israel's international standing that they so far, in recent months, have not been able to do that. And I welcome the changes in policy and approach that have occurred over the last couple of days of facilitating the flow of further aid and further food into Gaza.' The Greens will call for Australia to implement additional sanctions on Israel on Tuesday, matching the measures applied over Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The plan for so-called autonomous sanctions would target members of the Netanyahu government and other key decision-makers, limiting their travel and use of financial assets. Australia has sanctioned about 1,400 people in Russia over the war in Ukraine, but only a small number related to the war in Gaza. In June, Australia joined countries including the UK and New Zealand to sanction far-right Israeli government ministers Itamar Ben-Gvir and Bezalel Smotrich for inciting violence against Palestinians in the West Bank. The Greens will also seek sanctions to stop the export of goods and materials from Australia to Israel, including arms. The party is critical of the Albanese government for not blocking exports of key parts for fighter jets, manufactured in Australia and assembled in Israel. More details soon …


Daily Mail
7 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Democrat pushes for 'cognitive decline' tests for members of Congress
A push to set cognitive standards for the scores of aging lawmakers in Congress has hit a roadblock with their colleagues. After former President Joe Biden stunned the nation by cancelling his presidential bid weeks after his disastrous debate against Donald Trump, scrutiny over age-related decline has shifted from the White House to Capitol Hill. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., proposed an amendment earlier this summer that would force an independent congressional body that reviews misconduct allegations to create standards to determine lawmakers' 'ability to perform the duties of office unimpeded by significant irreversible cognitive impairment.' Her proposal was unanimously and swiftly rejected by her colleagues, though her effort to set cognitive standards is far from over. 'I hear about it at town halls; I heard a lot about it after the presidential debate,' Perez told the New York Times of Biden's fateful showdown against Trump last summer. 'It is my job to reflect my community's sentiment that this is a problem. It's my job to reflect the accelerating loss of confidence in this body.' 'We have all of these rules about dumb stuff — hats — and not this more significant question of who is making decisions in the office,' she said. Perez, 37, is the co-chair of Democrats' moderate Blue Dog Coalition. She is one of the few Democratic members of Congress to be elected in a district that President Donald Trump carried. She is also one of the few Democrats to express concerns over the health of Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, 88-year-old non-voting delegate for Washington, D.C. who has been dogged by reports about her cognitive decline. Norton, the oldest member of the House of Representatives, has shown signs of decline during her official duties. Aides frequently help her navigate the sprawling Capitol complex and they have had to walk back quotes Norton gives to reporters. But she seems unconcerned with her own condition, announcing recently that she would seek re-election next year, when she will be 89. One of her staffers later told reporters that 'no decision has been made' yet about the D.C. delegate's re-election. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle appear opposed to cognitive tests because they're seen as a personal attack on older lawmakers and infringe on Congress' long tradition that rewards seniority. According to an analysis done by the Times , more than one in five members, or 22 percent, of this Congress is 70 or older - a level not seen in modern history. Age-related issues in the Capitol have become painfully clear this year after three sitting members of Congress, all 70-years-old or older, have died this year while in office. In March, Democratic Reps. Sylvester Turner of Texas and Raúl Grijalva of Arizona passed away due to complications with cancer. Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly died in May from esophageal cancer while he held the top Democratic position on the powerful House Oversight Committee. In 2024, there were also three Democratic members of the House who passed away while in office. 'What I've heard from my neighbors, my community is this idea that this place is being run by a bunch of staffers,' Perez told Axios this year. 'And we're seeing a very real decline in confidence in Congress.' Despite her amendment getting shot down earlier this year, the 37-year-old has floated plans to renew her push for cognitive standards saying she may propose it as a stand alone bill. She has said she may court some Republican support to get her bill through the House. 'This is not an issue that's going away,' she told the Times. 'We're still talking to other members of Congress about a stand-alone bill, and trying to talk with leadership about a path forward here.' Her push comes amid a House Oversight Committee investigation into Biden's mental acuity and whether it was covered up by his top staffers. Many of the ex-Biden aides have pleaded their Fifth Amendment protections to not incriminate themselves during their interviews with the committee, raising questions about what they knew about the Democrat's health and when. 'It's a question of whether the elected member is making the decisions,' Perez said.


Daily Mail
8 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Growing push for cognitive decline tests for members of Congress hits snag despite 'accelerating loss of confidence'
A push to set cognitive standards for the scores of aging lawmakers in Congress has hit a roadblock with their colleagues. After former President Joe Biden stunned the nation by cancelling his presidential bid weeks after his disastrous debate against Donald Trump, scrutiny over age-related decline has shifted from the White House to Capitol Hill. Rep. Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, D-Wash., proposed an amendment earlier this summer that would force an independent congressional body that reviews misconduct allegations to create standards to determine lawmakers' 'ability to perform the duties of office unimpeded by significant irreversible cognitive impairment.' Her proposal was unanimously and swiftly rejected by her colleagues, though her effort to set cognitive standards is far from over. 'I hear about it at town halls; I heard a lot about it after the presidential debate,' Perez told the New York Times of Biden's fateful showdown against Trump last summer. 'It is my job to reflect my community's sentiment that this is a problem. It's my job to reflect the accelerating loss of confidence in this body.' 'We have all of these rules about dumb stuff — hats — and not this more significant question of who is making decisions in the office,' she said. Perez, 37, is the co-chair of Democrats' moderate Blue Dog Coalition. She is one of the few Democratic members of Congress to be elected in a district that President Donald Trump carried. She is also one of the few Democrats to express concerns over the health of Rep. Eleanor Holmes Norton, 88-year-old non-voting delegate for Washington, D.C. who has been dogged by reports about her cognitive decline. Norton, the oldest member of the House of Representatives, has shown signs of decline during her official duties. Aides frequently help her navigate the sprawling Capitol complex and they have had to walk back quotes Norton gives to reporters. But she seems unconcerned with her own condition, announcing recently that she would seek re-election next year, when she will be 89. One of her staffers later told reporters that 'no decision has been made' yet about the D.C. delegate's re-election. Lawmakers on both sides of the aisle appear opposed to cognitive tests because they're seen as a personal attack on older lawmakers and infringe on Congress' long tradition that rewards seniority. According to an analysis done by the Times, more than one in five members, or 22 percent, of this Congress is 70 or older - a level not seen in modern history. Age-related issues in the Capitol have become painfully clear this year after three sitting members of Congress, all 70-years-old or older, have died this year while in office. In March, Democratic Reps. Sylvester Turner of Texas and Raúl Grijalva of Arizona passed away due to complications with cancer. Virginia Rep. Gerry Connolly died in May from esophageal cancer while he held the top Democratic position on the powerful House Oversight Committee. In 2024, there were also three Democratic members of the House who passed away while in office. 'What I've heard from my neighbors, my community is this idea that this place is being run by a bunch of staffers,' Perez told Axios this year. 'And we're seeing a very real decline in confidence in Congress.' Despite her amendment getting shot down earlier this year, the 37-year-old has floated plans to renew her push for cognitive standards saying she may propose it as a stand alone bill. She has said she may court some Republican support to get her bill through the House. 'This is not an issue that's going away,' she told the Times. 'We're still talking to other members of Congress about a stand-alone bill, and trying to talk with leadership about a path forward here.' Her push comes amid a House Oversight Committee investigation into Biden's mental acuity and whether it was covered-up by his top staffers. Many of the ex-Biden aides have pleaded their Fifth Amendment protections to not incriminate themselves during their interviews with the committee, raising questions about what they knew about the Democrat's health and when. 'It's a question of whether the elected member is making the decisions,' Perez said.