Nigel Griffiths compared to 'Trident replacement

Home News Divisions MPs Lords MSPs Policies Forum Join Us Help / FAQ

voted ambiguously on the policy

by scoring 50.0% compared to the votes below

House	Date	Subject	Agreement with policy above
no votes listed
House	Date	Subject	Agreement with policy above
Commons	14 Mar 2007	Trident Replacement — Case not yet proven — rejected	agrees with policy
Commons	14 Mar 2007	Trident Replacement — Maintain nuclear deterrent beyond existing system	disagrees with policy

How the number is calculated

The MP's votes count towards a weighted average where the most important votes get 50 points, less important votes get 10 points, and less important votes for which the MP was absent get 2 points. In important votes the MP gets awarded the full 50 points for voting the same as the policy, no points for voting against the policy, and 25 points for not voting. In less important votes, the MP gets 10 points for voting with the policy, no points for voting against, and 1 (out of 2) if absent.

Questions about this formula can be discussed on the forum.

	No of votes	Points	Out of
Most important votes (50 points)
MP voted with policy	1	50	50
MP voted against policy	1	0	50
MP absent	0	0	0
Less important votes (10 points)
MP voted with policy	0	0	0
MP voted against policy	0	0	0
Less important absentees (2 points)
MP absent*	0	0	0
Total:		50	100
*Pressure of other work means MPs or Lords are not always available to vote – it does not always indicate they have abstained. Therefore, being absent on a less important vote makes a disproportionatly small difference.

agreement score =

MP's points

total points

100

= 50.0 %.