HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

Press Release on July 14, 2015

Special Announcements

Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong has uploaded the full set of video record of the July 1 Rally onto the “PopCon” e-platform （http://popcon.hk）。People can download the videos from the “July 1 Rally Feature page”, and do their own headcount of the Rally. Video clips at higher resolutions are also available for purchase at production cost. Details available at the feature page.

To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, POP has already released for public examination some time ago via the HKU POP SITE” (http://hkupop.pori.hk)the raw data of all 75 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 76th CE rating survey of CY Leung. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.

Abstract

POP interviewed 1,009 Hong Kong people between 6 and 10 July, 2015 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey conducted in early July shows that the support rating of CE CY Leung has slightly increased to 45.4 marks from late June, back above the warning line of 45 marks again, first time since August last year. Leung’s approval rate now stands at 26%, disapproval rate 57%, giving a net popularity of negative 31 percentage points. As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 57.2 marks, her approval rate 49%, disapproval rate 16%, giving a net popularity of positive 33 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 60.1 marks, approval rate 56%, disapproval rate 9%, thus a net popularity of positive 48 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 49.6 marks, approval rate 31%, disapproval rate 23%, giving a net popularity of positive 8 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating, 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 8 among the 12 Directors have gone up, while 3 have gone down and one remains unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So, Secretary for Development Paul Chan and Secretary for Education Eddie Ng register significant changes in their net approval rates, up by 12, 11, 11 and 8 percentage points respectively. Among all the Directors, only Paul Chan and Eddie Ng register negative popularities, at negative 25 and 26 percentage points respectively. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 65 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, Lai Tung-kwok, Anthony Cheung, Gregory So, Wong Kam-sing, Raymond Tam, Rimsky Yuen, Tsang Tak-sing, Paul Chan and Eddie Ng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung falls 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 +/-4 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 66%.

Points to note:

[1]The address of the “HKU POP SITE” is http://hkupop.pori.hk, journalists can check out the details of the survey there.
[2]The sample size of this survey is 1,009 successful interviews, not 1,009 x 65.7% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] 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. When quoting these figures, journalists can state “sampling error of rating not more than +/-2.2, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, and sampling error of net values not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level”.
[4]Because of sampling errors in conducting the survey(s) and the rounding procedures in processing the data, the figures cannot be too precise, and the totals may not be completely accurate. Therefore, when quoting percentages of the survey(s), journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, but when quoting the rating figures, one decimal place can be used.
[5] The data of this survey is collected by means of random telephone interviews conducted by real interviewers, not by any interactive voice system (IVS). If a research organization uses “computerized random telephone survey” to camouflage its IVS operation, it should be considered unprofessional.

Latest Figures

POP today releases the latest popularity figures of CE CY Leung and various Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system. From 2014, POP enhanced the previous simple weighting method based on age and gender distribution to “rim weighting” based on age, gender and education (highest level attended) distribution. The latest figures released today have been rim-weighted according to provisional figures obtained from the Census and Statistics Department regarding the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population in 2014 year-end and the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:

Date of survey	Overall sample size	Response rate	Maximum sampling error of percentages^[6]
6-10/7/2015	1,009	65.7%	+/-3%

[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.

As different questions involve different sub-samples, the sampling errors will vary accordingly. The table below briefly shows the relationship between sample size and maximum sampling errors for the readers to capture the corresponding changes:

Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)	Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)
Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)	Sample size (total sample or sub-sample)	Sampling error of percentages^[7] (maximum values)
1,300	+/- 2.8 %	1,350	+/- 2.7 %
1,200	+/- 2.9 %	1,250	+/- 2.8 %
1,100	+/- 3.0 %	1,150	+/- 3.0 %
1,000	+/- 3.2 %	1,050	+/- 3.1 %
900	+/- 3.3 %	950	+/- 3.2 %
800	+/- 3.5 %	850	+/- 3.4 %
700	+/- 3.8 %	750	+/- 3.7 %
600	+/- 4.1 %	650	+/- 3.9 %
500	+/- 4.5 %	550	+/- 4.3 %
400	+/- 5.0 %	450	+/- 4.7 %

[7]Based on 95% confidence interval.

Recent popularity figures of CE CY Leung are summarized as follows:

Date of survey	20-26/4/15	4-7/5/15	15-21/5/15	3-9/6/15	22-25/6/15	6-10/7/15	Latest change
Sample base	1,070	1,003	1,063	1,066	1,038	1,009	--
Overall response rate	67.0%	66.2%	65.6%	63.9%	67.4%	65.7%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding and error ^{^[8]}	--
Rating of CE CY Leung	44.5	43.2	44.6	42.6^[9]	44.1	45.4+/-1.8	+1.3
Vote of confidence in CE CY Leung	26%	21%^[9]	22%	23%	27%^[9]	26+/-3%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in CE CY Leung	56%	58%	57%	58%	56%	57+/-3%	+1%
Net approval rate	-30%	-37%^[9]	-35%	-35%	-29%^[9]	-31+/-5%	-2%

[8]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 +/-1.8, 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.
[9]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.

Recent popularity figures of the three Secretaries of Departments under the accountability system are summarized below:

Date of survey	2-5/3/15	31/3-9/4/15	4-7/5/15	3-9/6/15	6-10/7/15	Latest change
Sample base^[10]	633-720	664-689	556-589	537-605	579-686	--
Overall response rate	67.2%	68.4%	66.2%	63.9%	65.7%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error ^{^[11]}	--
Rating of CS Carrie Lam	54.0	56.2^[12]	57.4	55.4	57.2+/-2.0	+1.8
Vote of confidence in CS Carrie Lam	46%	49%	54%^[12]	54%	49+/-4%	-5%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in CS Carrie Lam	21%	15%^[12]	17%	21%	16+/-3%	-5%^[12]
Net approval rate	26%	34%^[12]	37%	33%	33+/-6%	--
Rating of FS John Tsang	59.0^[12]	60.2	58.2 ^[12]	59.0	60.1+/-1.7	+1.1
Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang	57%	59%	49%^[12]	57%^[12]	56+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang	12%	12%	13%	13%	9+/-2%	-4%^[12]
Net approval rate	45%	47%	36%^[12]	44%^[12]	48+/-5%	+4%
Rating of SJ Rimsky Yuen	45.1	48.1^[12]	50.1	49.8	49.6+/-2.2	-0.2
Vote of confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen	28%^[12]	30%	35%^[12]	36%	31+/-4%	-5%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen	32%	26%^[12]	22%^[12]	25%	23+/-4%	-2%
Net approval rate	-4%^[12]	4%^[12]	13%^[12]	10%	8+/-6%	-2%

[10] 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. The survey conducted on 25/2/2015 was the instant survey after the Budget Speech and only asked rating of FS as well as his vote of confidence.
[11] 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 +/-2.2, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-6% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[12] 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:

Date of survey	4-7/5/15		3-9/6/15		6-10/7/15		Latest change
Sample base ^[13]	582-625		612-655		589-628		--
Overall response rate	66.2%		63.9%		65.7%		--
Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer	Base	%	Base	%	Base	% & error ^[14]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man	617	74%^[15]	646	74%	620	73+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man	617	8%^[15]	646	7%	620	8+/-2%	+1%
Net approval rate	617	66%^[15]	646	67%	620	65+/-5%	-2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	625	45%	625	48%	625	49+/-4%	+1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	625	18%	625	16%	625	15+/-3%	-1%
Net approval rate	625	27%	625	32%	625	34+/-6%	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	602	41%	655	42%	611	41+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	602	10%^[15]	655	8%	611	10+/-2%	+2%
Net approval rate	602	30%	655	35%	611	32+/-5%	-3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang	609	26%	635	29%	615	29+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang	609	11%	635	12%	615	9+/-2%	-3%^[15]
Net approval rate	609	16%^[16]	635	17%	615	20+/-5%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung	601	39%	616	30%^[15]	595	38+/-4%	+8%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung	601	23%	616	27%	595	23+/-3%	-4%^[15]
Net approval rate	601	16%^[16]	616	3%^[15]	595	15+/-6%	+12%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok	613	42%^[15]	650	36%^[15]	589	41+/-4%	+5%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok	613	25%^[15]	650	27%	589	26+/-4%	-1%
Net approval rate	613	17%^[15]	650	9%^[15]	589	14+/-7%	+5%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing	612	35%	617	36%	628	32+/-4%	-4%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing	612	23%	617	22%	628	20+/-3%	-2%
Net approval rate	612	12%	617	13%	628	12+/-6%	-1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So	601	32%	634	26%^[15]	590	32+/-4%	+6%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So	601	25%	634	27%	590	23+/-3%	-4%^[15]
Net approval rate	601	7%	634	-2%^[15]	590	9+/-6%	+11%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam	605	30%	643	33%	591	31+/-4%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam	605	24%	643	28%	591	24+/-4%	-4%
Net approval rate	605	5%	643	5%	591	7+/-6%^[17]	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	602	30%	628	32%	610	31+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	602	21%	628	25%	610	24+/-4%	-1%
Net approval rate	602	9%	628	7%	610	7+/-6%^[17]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Paul Chan	582	19%	636	17%	609	21+/-3%	+4%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Paul Chan	582	52%	636	53%	609	46+/-4%	-7%^[15]
Net approval rate	582	-33%	636	-36%	609	-25+/-6%	+11%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Eddie Ng	616	19%^[15]	612	17%	600	20+/-3%	+3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Eddie Ng	616	45%	612	51%^[15]	600	46+/-4%	-5%^[15]
Net approval rate	616	-26%^[15]	612	-34%^[15]	600	-26+/-6%	+8%^[15]

[13] Starting from 2006, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.
[14] 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.
[15] 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.
[16]Based on the figures in early May survey, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung and Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang are 16.1 and 15.7 percentage points. Thus, they ranked fifth and sixth at that time.
[17] Based on the figures of latest survey, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam and Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing are 7.3 and 6.9 percentage points. Thus, they are ranked ninth and tenth this time.

The latest survey showed that, CE CY Leung scored 45.4 marks, and 26% supported him as CE, his net approval rate is negative 31 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Carrie Lam, FS John Tsang and SJ Rimsky Yuen were 57.2, 60.1 and 49.6 marks, and 49%, 56% and 31% would vote for their reappointment correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 33, positive 48 and positive 8 percentage points respectively.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, according to the net approval rates, results revealed that the top position goes to Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man, attaining positive 65 percentage points. The 2nd and 3rd places belong to Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung and Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan with net approval rates of positive 34 and 32 percentage points respectively. Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang, Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung, Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Development Paul Chan and Secretary for Education Eddie Ng ranked 4th to 12th, their corresponding net approval rates are positive 20, positive 15, positive 14, positive 12, positive 9, positive 7, positive 7, negative 25 and negative 26 percentage points. In other words, only Ko Wing-man scored net approval rate of over 50% among all Directors of Bureaux.

Opinion Daily

In January 2007, POP opened a feature page called “Opinion Daily” at the “POP Site”, to record significant events an/ 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 3 to 9 June, 2015 while this survey was conducted from 6 to 10 July, 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.

10/7/15	A high level of lead is found in water samples from Kai Ching Estate.
6/7/15	Hang Seng Index declines sharply.
4/7/15	The Hong Kong Garrison of the People’s Liberation Army stages a military exercise in Tuen Mun.
30/6/15	The lastest estimate of high-speed railway surges to HK$85.3 billion, which is 31.2% above the original budget.
25/6/15	WhatsApp messages of a pro-establishment camp chat group leak.
19/6/15	Government moves funds request for the Innovation and Technology Bureau behind other livelihood issues.
18/6/15	The political reform package is vetoed.
15/6/15	Police arrest 10 people, some with alleged ties to a radical political organization, after discovering powerful explosives.
13/6/15	Police remove potentially dangerous items from Legislative Council Road, Tim Mei Avenue and Harcourt Road.
9/6/15	Hong Kong government announces a “red travel alert” against South Korea for the threat of MERS.
4/6/15	The undocumented boy Siu Yau-wai seeks voluntary repatriation to mainland.

Commentary

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

Our latest survey conducted in early July shows that the support rating of CE CY Leung has slightly increased to 45.4 marks from late June, back above the warning line of 45 marks again, first time since August last year. Leung’s approval rate now stands at 26%, disapproval rate 57%, giving a net popularity of negative 31 percentage points.

As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Carrie Lam is 57.2 marks, her approval rate 49%, disapproval rate 16%, giving a net popularity of positive 33 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS John Tsang is 60.1 marks, approval rate 56%, disapproval rate 9%, thus a net popularity of positive 48 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 49.6 marks, approval rate 31%, disapproval rate 23%, giving a net popularity of positive 8 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating, 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 8 among the 12 Directors have gone up, while 3 have gone down and one remains unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So, Secretary for Development Paul Chan nd Secretary for Education Eddie Ng register significant changes in their net approval rates, up by 12, 11, 11 and 8 percentage points respectively. Among all the Directors, only Paul Chan and Eddie Ng register negative popularities, at negative 25 and 26 percentage points respectively. Ko Wing-man continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 65 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, Lai Tung-kwok, Anthony Cheung, Gregory So, Wong Kam-sing, Raymond Tam, Rimsky Yuen, Tsang Tak-sing, Paul Chan and Eddie Ng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Paul Tang can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. CY Leung falls into the category of “depressing” performer, while no one falls into that of “disastrous”.

The following table summarizes the grading of CE and the principal officials for readers’ easy reference:

“Ideal”: those with approval rates of over 66%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

Secretary for Food and Health Ko Wing-man (73%)

“Successful”: those with approval rates of over 50%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

FS John Tsang Chun-wah (56%)

“Mediocre”: those not belonging to other 5 types; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

CS Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (49%)^[18]; Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (49%)^[18]; Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan Ka-keung (41%)^[19]; Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok (41%)^[19]; Secretary for Transport and Housing Anthony Cheung Bing-leung (38%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So Kam-leung (32%)^[20]; Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing (32%)^[20]; Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen (31%)^[21]; SJ Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung (31%)^[21]; Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (31%)^[21]; Secretary for Development Paul Chan Mo-po (21%); Secretary for Education Eddie Ng Hak-kim (20%)

“Inconspicuous”: those with recognition rates of less than 50%; ranked by their approval rates; the first figure inside bracket is approval rate while the second figure is recognition rate

Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang Kwok-wai (29%, 37%)

“Depressing”: those with disapproval rates of over 50%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets

CE Leung Chun-ying (57%)

“Disastrous”: those with disapproval rates of over 66%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets

[18]In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of CS Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung are 49.0% and 48.6%.
[19] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan Ka-keung and Secretary for Security Lai Tung-kwok are 41.4% and 40.8%.
[20] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Gregory So Kam-leung and Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing are 32.2% and 31.8%.
[21] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Raymond Tam Chi-yuen, SJ Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung and Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing are 31.5%, 31.4% and 30.8%.

Future Release (Tentative)

July 21, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Ratings of Top 10 Legislative Councillors