voted ambiguously on the policy
by scoring 41.7% compared to the votes below
|House||Date||Subject||Steve Reed||Policy vote|
|Commons||5 Dec 2012||Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Amendment of Schedule 1) Order 2012 — Extension of Legal Aid to Certain Welfare Appeals and Certain International Child Benefit Recovery Cases||minority||minority (strong)|
|Commons||5 Dec 2012||Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) Regulations 2012||minority||Majority|
|Commons||22 Jan 2014||Civil Legal Aid (Merits Criteria) (Amendment) (No. 2) Regulations — Legal Aid In Cases With Borderline Prospect of Success||minority||Majority|
|Commons||9 Jul 2014||Draft Civil Legal Aid, Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 (Amendment of Schedule 1) Order 2014 — Residence Test for Legal Aid Eligibility||minority||Majority (strong)|
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|
|Less important votes (10 points)|
|MP voted with policy||0||0||0|
|MP voted against policy||2||0||20|
|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.