voted ambiguously on the policy
by scoring 53.8% compared to the votes below
|House||Date||Subject||David Taylor||Policy vote|
|Commons||27 Jan 2004||Higher Education Bill — Second Reading — Increase in University Tuition Fees||both||minority (strong)|
|Commons||31 Mar 2004||Higher Education Bill — New Clause 5 — Abolition of tuition fees chargeable to qualifying student||Majority||Majority|
|Commons||31 Mar 2004||Higher Education Bill — New Clause 5 — Abolition of tuition fees chargeable to qualifying student||minority||minority|
|Commons||31 Mar 2004||Higher Education Bill — Third Reading||absent||minority (strong)|
|Commons||23 Jun 2004||Higher Education Bill — Clause 27 — Sections 22 to 26: supplementary provisions||absent||minority|
|Commons||19 Jul 2004||The Student Fees (Amounts) (England) Regulations 2004||Majority||minority|
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||0||0||0|
|MP voted against policy||0||0||0|
|Less important votes (10 points)|
|MP voted with policy||2||20||20|
|MP voted against policy||1||0||10|
|Less important absentees (2 points)|
*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.