A large majority of people do not understand the method for the calculation of party-list MPs, particularly a spat over whether in order to divide the party-list votes by a hundred or 500, based on the result of a study by the National Company of Development Management, or Nida Poll.
The poll was performed on July 11-13 by telephone interviews with 1, 312 people aged 18 and over of various levels of education, jobs and incomes through the entire country after Parliament on July 6 voted to approve a proposal simply by New Palang Dharma Party leader Ravee Maschamadol to divide the number of party-list ballots by 500, instead of 100 as initially proposed.
Under the approved formulation, 500, which is the total number of all MPs (400 from constituencies and 100 through party-lists), will be used to divide party-list votes to determine the minimum number of listed MPs for each political party.
Asked whether or not they understand the calculation technique, particularly over the usage of 500 or hundred to divide the particular party-list votes, sixty two. 35% said “no”, not at all; 21. 11% said “yes”, but only a little; 11. 74% said “yes”, moderately; and 4. 80% said “yes”, fully.
Of the respondents along with full and reasonable understanding (217), whenever asked to opinion about the Parliament’s decision to divide by 500, their response were split : with 36. 41% in total disagreement; thirty. 41% in moderate agreement; 16. 59% in full agreement; plus 16. 59% in moderate disagreement.
When the 217 respondents with full and moderate understanding of the calculation method were asked the reason why Parliament members voted to use 500, the particular replies varied:
– 28. 11% said they wanted all party-list votes to be significant;
– 23. 96% said parties in the present coalition govt wanted to stay on following the next election;
– 20. 28% said they needed small parties to get some seats within Parliament;
— 17. 97% stated they did not want any particular part of win by a landslide; and
– 9. 68% said did so in return for votes to back up the prime minister plus 10 other cabinet members in the forthcoming no-confidence debate.
Asked to comment on the House associated with Representatives having 2 types of MPs, through constituencies and party-lists, 58. 39% said they wanted to have both types of MPs; 33. 38% mentioned there should be only constituency MPs; and 8. 23% said there ought to be only party-list MPs.