HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

(1) The Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong conducted a headcount exercise on February 1 and released the preliminary results on the same day. POP has now released the details of the headcount via the “HKU POP Site” (http://hkupop.pori.hk), and will upload the video clippings onto the “PopCon Site” (http://popcon.hk) for people to verify the figures this week.

(2) To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, POP has already released for public examination some time ago via its “POP Site” the raw data of all 65 regular rating surveys of CE CY Leung, as well as the 181 regular rating surveys of former CE Donald Tsang and 239 regular rating surveys of former CE CH Tung, along with related demographics of respondents. POP today releases the raw data of the latest which is the 66th CE rating survey of CY Leung. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.

POP interviewed 1,028 Hong Kong people between 30 January and 4 February, 2015 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our survey shows that the popularity figures of CE CY Leung continue to drop. His latest support rating stands at 40.9 marks, approval rate at 24%, disapproval rate 62%, giving a net popularity of negative 38 percentage points, sort of back to the level registered before the Policy Address. In other words, the popularity effect of the Policy Address has receded. As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 54.2 marks, her approval rate 48%, disapproval rate 23%, giving a net popularity of positive 25 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 58.6 marks, approval rate 55%, disapproval rate 13%, and net popularity positive 42 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 46.4 marks, approval rate 32%, disapproval rate 29%, giving a net popularity of positive 3 percentage points. Both the support rating and net popularity of Carrie Lam are at all-time record lows since she became CS. John Tsang continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department. As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 6 among the 12 Directors have gone down, while 4 have gone up and 2 remain unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam, Secretary for Development Paul Chan, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing and Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man register significant changes in their net approval rates, down by 11 percentage points and up by 7, 7 and 6 percentages points respectively. Among all the Directors, Raymond Tam, Lai Tung-kwok, Eddie Ng and Paul Chan register negative popularities, at negative 3, 5, 30 and 31 percentage points respectively. Raymond Tam and Lai Tung-kwok register all-time lows since they became Directors. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 78 percentage points. According to POP’s standard, Ko Wing-man falls under the category of “ideal” performer, John Tsang falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of Carrie Lam, Matthew Cheung, Ceajer Chan, Anthony Cheung, Wong Kam-sing, Rimsky Yuen, Lai Tung-kwok, Tsang Tak-sing, Gregory So, Raymond Tam and Paul Chan can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung and Eddie Ng fall into the category of “depressing” performer, while no one falls into that of “disastrous”. The maximum sampling errors of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-3 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling errors of rating figures and net approval rates need another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 68%. As the support rating of CE CY Leung continues to stand below the warning line of 45 again, Director of POP, Robert Chung, again reprints the abstracts of two articles written by him before on CE popularity, to discuss the possibility of a governance crisis. The articles can be downloaded in full from the POP Site.

[6] Errors are calculated at 95% confidence level using full sample size. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Questions using only sub-samples would have bigger sampling error. Sampling errors of ratings and net approval rates are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.

[7] Based on 95% confidence interval.

[8] This survey was the instant survey after the Policy Address and only asked rating of CE as well as his vote of confidence. Its sample size was 640.
[9] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of rating not more than +/-1.9, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-5% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[10] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

[11] The frequency of this series of questions is different from that of CE popularity ratings. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals. Starting from 2011, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.
[12] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of various ratings not more than +/-2.4, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[13] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

Latest popularity figures of Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system are summarized below, in descending order of net approval rates:

[14] Starting from 2006, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.
[15] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% and sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[16] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

The latest survey showed that, CE CY Leung scored 40.9 marks, and 24% supported him as CE, his net approval rate is negative 38 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Carrie Lam, FS John Tsang and SJ Rimsky Yuen were 54.2, 58.6 and 46.4 marks, and 48%, 55% and 32% would vote for their reappointment correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 25, positive 42 and positive 3 percentage points respectively.

In January 2007, POP opened a feature page called “Opinion Daily” at the “POP Site”, to record significant events and selected polling figures on a day-to-day basis, in order to let readers judge by themselves the reasons for the ups and downs of different opinion figures. In July 2007, POP collaborated with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP each day starting from July 24, a record of significant events of that day, according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would be uploaded to “Opinion Daily” as soon as they are verified by POP.

For the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey of some items was conducted from 2 to 8 January, 2015 while this survey was conducted from 30 January to 4 February, 2015. During this period, herewith the significant events selected from counting newspaper headlines and commentaries on a daily basis and covered by at least 25% of the local newspaper articles. Readers can make their own judgment if these significant events have any impacts to different polling figures.

Note: The following commentary was written by Director of POP, Robert Chung.

Our latest survey conducted in late January to early February shows that the popularity figures of CE CY Leung continue to drop. His latest support rating stands at 40.9 marks, approval rate at 24%, disapproval rate 62%, giving a net popularity of negative 38 percentage points, sort of back to the level registered before the Policy Address. In other words, the popularity effect of the Policy Address has receded.

As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 54.2 marks, her approval rate 48%, disapproval rate 23%, giving a net popularity of positive 25 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 58.6 marks, approval rate 55%, disapproval rate 13%, and net popularity positive 42 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 46.4 marks, approval rate 32%, disapproval rate 29%, giving a net popularity of positive 3 percentage points. Both the support rating and net popularity of Carrie Lam are at all-time record lows since she became CS. John Tsang continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 6 among the 12 Directors have gone down, while 4 have gone up and 2 remain unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam, Secretary for Development Paul Chan, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing and Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man register significant changes in their net approval rates, down by 11 percentage points and up by 7, 7 and 6 percentages points respectively. Among all the Directors, Raymond Tam, Lai Tung-kwok, Eddie Ng and Paul Chan register negative popularities, at negative 3, 5, 30 and 31 percentage points respectively. Raymond Tam and Lai Tung-kwok register all-time lows since they became Directors. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 78 percentage points.

According to POP’s standard, Ko Wing-man falls under the category of “ideal” performer, John Tsang falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of Carrie Lam, Matthew Cheung, Ceajer Chan, Anthony Cheung, Wong Kam-sing, Rimsky Yuen, Lai Tung-kwok, Tsang Tak-sing, Gregory So, Raymond Tam and Paul Chan can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung and Eddie Ng fall into the category of “depressing” performer, while no one falls into that of “disastrous”.

• February 12, 2015 (Thursday) 1pm to 2pm: Second follow-up survey of Policy Address

• February 17, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Social, freedom and legal indicators