返回
1.而家想請你用0-100分評價你對財經事務及庫務局局長馬時亨既支持程度，0分代表絕對唔支持，100分代表絕對支持，50分代表一半半，你會俾幾多分財經事務及庫務局局長馬時亨呢？ (按月計算)
2.假設明天你有權投票決定續任或者罷免馬時亨作為財經事務及庫務局局長，你會投續任、罷免、定棄權票？ (按月計算)
3.你認為馬時亨做財經事務及庫務局局長既工作做得好唔好? (按月計算)
1.Please use a scale of 0-100 to rate your extent of support to the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Frederick Ma Si-hang, with 0 indicating absolutely not supportive, 100 indicating absolutely supportive and 50 indicating half-half. How would you rate the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Frederick Ma Si-hang? (monthly average)
2.If you had the right to vote on the reappointment or dismissal of Frederick Ma Si-hang as the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury tomorrow, how would you vote? (monthly average)
3.Do you think Frederick Ma Si-hang is doing a good or bad job as the Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury? (monthly average)
| 調查月份 Month of Survey |
0至100支持度評分 0-100 support rating |
假想投票續任率 Hypothetical vote share on reappointment |
工作表現認許率 Job performance approval rate |
| 6/2007 | 55.0 | 38.2% | - |
| 5/2007 | 55.5 | - | - |
| 4/2007 | - | 43.8% | - |
| 3/2007 | 54.2 | - | - |
| 2/2007 | - | 35.5% | - |
| 1/2007 | 52.9 | 38.3% | - |
| 12/2006 | 52.4 | 37.4% | - |
| 11/2006 | 52.4 | - | - |
| 10/2006 | - | 34.7% | - |
| 9/2006 | 51.4 | 34.3% | - |
| 8/2006 | - | 37.2% | - |
| 7/2006 | 52.7 | - | - |
| 6/2006 | 52.2 | 33.7% | - |
| 5/2006 | 52.6 | - | - |
| 4/2006 | - | 36.1% | - |
| 3/2006 | 53.2 | 31.9% | - |
| 2/2006 | - | 33.6% | - |
| 1/2006 | 52.7 | - | - |
| 12/2005 | 51.5 | 34.2% | - |
| 11/2005 | 53.5 | - | - |
| 10/2005 | 53.1 | 36.5% | - |
| 9/2005 | 52.6 | - | - |
| 8/2005 | 50.3 | 31.9% | - |
| 7/2005 | 52.3 | - | - |
| 6/2005 | 51.5 | 34.0% | - |
| 5/2005 | 50.3 | - | - |
| 4/2005 | 50.1 | 32.0% | - |
| 3/2005 | 47.2 | - | - |
| 2/2005 | 48.7 | 30.7% | 18.9% |
| 1/2005 | 48.9 | - | - |
| 12/2004 | 48.5 | 28.3% | - |
| 11/2004 | 50.1 | - | - |
| 10/2004 | 48.8 | 32.5% | - |
| 9/2004 | 48.9 | - | - |
| 8/2004 | 47.7 | 30.6% | 17.4% |
| 7/2004 | 45.8 | - | - |
| 6/2004 | 44.3 | 25.8% | - |
| 5/2004 | 45.9 | - | - |
| 4/2004 | 45.5 | 26.5% | - |
| 3/2004 | 46.4 | - | - |
| 2/2004 | 44.0 | 21.7% | 11.9% |
| 1/2004 | 44.7 | - | - |
| 12/2003 | 42.7 | 19.4% | - |
| 11/2003 | 44.6 | - | - |
| 10/2003 | 43.3 | - | - |
| 9/2003 | 42.9 | 20.7% | - |
| 8/2003 | 42.0 | - | 8.1% |
| 7/2003 | 38.2 | - | - |
| 6/2003 | 40.9 | 16.1% | 7.5% |
| 5/2003 | 44.2 | - | - |
| 4/2003 | 41.3 | - | 8.5% |
| 3/2003 | 42.0 | 19.1% | - |
| 2/2003 | 42.4 | - | 7.6% |
| 1/2003 | 42.2 | - | - |
| 12/2002 | 39.9 | 14.8% | 7.7% |
| 11/2002 | 41.1 | - | - |
| 10/2002 | 39.0 | - | 4.9% |
| 9/2002 | 43.2 | 16.5% | - |
| 8/2002 | 42.3 | - | 6.7% |
| 7/2002 | 53.8 | - | - |
