HKU POP releases the Budget second follow-up surveyBack
Press Release on March 22, 2016
| Detailed Findings (Budget Feature Page) |
Special Announcement
To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, Public Opinion Programme (POP) at The University of Hong Kong has already released for public examination some time ago via the “HKU POP SITE” (http://hkupop.pori.hk) the raw data of all 93 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. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.
Abstract
POP interviewed 504 Hong Kong people from 14 to 15 March by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Over the years, we find people’s receptiveness of the government’s Budget drops in our follow-up surveys after it has been debated for some time. The situation this year is that people’s initial appraisal of the Budget can be considered positive, with a net satisfaction of positive 17 percentage points. After one to two days’ media widespread coverage, the reaction became even more positive, net satisfaction rate went up significantly to positive 24 percentage points. However, three weeks later, it drops slightly to positive 21 percentage points. Satisfaction rating also drops slightly from 60.5 to 60.2 marks. In terms of specific policies, opinions are split on whether the relief measures suggested by the FS are enough or not, but people continue to think his suggestions to implement support measures to small and medium enterprises are enough, and agree that the budget plan mainly benefits the middle class. With respect to the Financial Secretary’s saying “tension and turbulence are mounting in Hong Kong, we need to look squarely at the problems and have the determination to resolve these conflicts”, nearly 70% agree to this saying. Finally, people continue to consider Hong Kong’s tax system as fair, but the distribution of wealth unreasonable. Meanwhile, 36% are satisfied with the government’s fiscal policies, 37% are dissatisfied, giving a net satisfaction of negative 1 percentage point which is the first negative value registered again since March 2014. The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figure is +/-1.9, and that of net values needs another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 68%.
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 overall sample size of this survey is 504 successful interviews, not 504 x 67.7% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error needs another calculation.
“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 +/-1.9, that of percentages not more than +/-4% and net values not more than +/-8% 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.
Background
Since 1992, HKUPOP has already been conducting Policy Address instant surveys every year. From 1998 onwards, we expanded our instant surveys to cover the Budget Talks. In 2008, we revised our research design by splitting up our instant survey into two rounds, while our follow-up survey operation weeks later remains intact, to become the third survey under our new design. Starting 2011, we revised our design to concentrate on people’s appraisal of the Budget and FS’s popularity in our instant survey, and move the remaining questions to our follow-up surveys. There is no change to our operation this year.
For this year’s Budget, in our first survey, we measured people’s overall appraisal of the Budget, their rating of the Budget, and the Financial Secretary’s popularity. Our results were released on February 25. For our first Budget follow up survey, we focused on people’s reactions towards major government proposals, their satisfaction with the government’s fiscal policies, and other relevant issues. Our results were released on March 2 respectively. Today we are releasing the results of our second Budget follow up and it is the last survey.
Latest Figures
POP today releases the findings of the Budget follow-up poll. 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 2015 year-end and the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information of various surveys:
|
Round of survey |
Date of survey |
Sample base |
Overall response rate |
Sampling error of percentages [6] |
|
2016 second follow up survey |
14-15/3/2016 |
504 |
67.7% |
+/-4% |
|
2016 first follow up survey |
25-26/2/2016 |
514 |
68.6% |
+/-4% |
|
2016 instant survey |
24/2/2016 |
528 |
63.6% |
+/-4% |
[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.
Results of the Budget follow-up poll, together with the previous two surveys, are tabulated below:
|
Date of survey |
Instant survey |
First follow up survey |
Second follow up survey |
Latest Change |
|||
|
24/2/2016 |
25-26/2/2016 |
14-15/3/2016 |
-- |
||||
|
Overall response rate |
63.6% |
68.6% |
67.7% |
-- |
|||
|
Sub sample size for each qn/ Finding |
Base |
Finding |
Base |
Finding |
Base |
Finding/Error[7] |
-- |
|
Satisfaction rating of Budget (0 to 100 marks) |
500[8] |
57.2 |
514 |
60.5[11] |
504 |
60.2+/-1.9 |
-0.3 |
|
Appraisal of Budget: Satisfaction rate [9] |
500[8] |
36% |
514 |
41%[11] |
504 |
42+/-4% |
+1% |
|
Appraisal of Budget: Dissatisfaction rate [9] |
500[8] |
20% |
514 |
17% |
504 |
21+/-4% |
+4% |
|
Net satisfaction rate |
17% |
24%[11] |
21+/-7% |
-3% |
|||
|
Mean value[9] |
3.2 (Base=432) |
3.3 (Base=449) |
3.3+/-0.1 (Base=433) |
-- |
|||
|
Measures suggested by the Financial Secretary to relieve people’s stress are enough |
-- |
-- |
514 |
51% |
504 |
49+/-4% |
-2% |
|
Measures suggested by the Financial Secretary to relieve people’s stress are not enough |
-- |
-- |
514 |
43% |
504 |
45+/-4% |
+2% |
|
Measures suggested by the Financial Secretary to support SMEs in order to boost the economy include: reduce profits tax by 75%, subject to a ceiling of $20,000; waiving the business registration fees; and waving the licence fees for many restaurants, travel agents, hotels and guesthouses for one year, are enough. |
-- |
-- |
514 |
53% |
504 |
49+/-4% |
-4% |
|
Measures suggested by the Financial Secretary to support SMEs in order to boost the economy include: reduce profits tax by 75%, subject to a ceiling of $20,000; waiving the business registration fees; and waving the licence fees for many restaurants, travel agents, hotels and guesthouses for one year, are not enough. |
-- |
-- |
514 |
29% |
504 |
33+/-4% |
+4% |
|
Agree with Financial Secretary’s saying that “tension and turbulence are mounting in Hong Kong. Many of us feel suffocated by and, indeed, helpless with the tiresome confrontations day in and day out. We need to look squarely at these factors in resolving the differences and, more importantly, we need to have the determination to resolve these conflicts”. |
-- |
-- |
514 |
73% |
504 |
69+/-4% |
-4% |
|
Disagree with Financial Secretary’s saying that “tension and turbulence are mounting in Hong Kong. Many of us feel suffocated by and, indeed, helpless with the tiresome confrontations day in and day out. We need to look squarely at these factors in resolving the differences and, more importantly, we need to have the determination to resolve these conflicts”. |
-- |
-- |
514 |
9% |
504 |
13+/-3% |
+4%[11] |
|
Agree with the saying that the budget plan mainly benefits the middle class |
-- |
-- |
514 |
52% |
504 |
43+/-4% |
-9%[11] |
|
Disagree with the saying that the budget plan mainly benefits the middle class |
-- |
-- |
514 |
23% |
504 |
27+/-4% |
+4% |
|
Satisfied with the government’s strategy in monetary arrangement [9] |
-- |
-- |
514 |
37% |
504 |
36+/-4% |
-1% |
|
Dissatisfied with the government’s strategy in monetary arrangement [9] |
-- |
-- |
514 |
34% |
504 |
37+/-4% |
+3% |
|
Net satisfaction rate |
-- |
3% |
-1+/-8% |
-4% |
|||
|
Mean value[9] |
-- |
2.9 (Base=457) |
2.9+/-0.1 (Base=472) |
-- |
|||
|
Perceived the tax system in Hong Kong to be fair [10] |
-- |
-- |
514 |
58% |
504 |
61+/-4% |
+3% |
|
Perceived the tax system in Hong Kong to be unfair [10] |
-- |
-- |
514 |
28% |
504 |
28+/-4% |
-- |
|
Perceived the distribution of wealth in Hong Kong to be reasonable [10] |
-- |
-- |
514 |
30% |
504 |
26+/-4% |
-4% |
|
Perceived the distribution of wealth in Hong Kong to be unreasonable [10] |
-- |
-- |
514 |
57% |
504 |
62+/-4% |
+5%[11] |
[7] 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.
Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected. Media can state “sampling error of various ratings not
more than +/-1.9, that of percentages not more than +/-4% and net values not more than +/-8% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The
error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[8] Excluding respondents who had not heard of/were not clear about the Budget.
[9] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[10] Collapsed from a 4-point scale.
[11] 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 second follow up survey conducted in mid-March revealed that, 42% of the respondents were satisfied with the Budget and 21% were dissatisfied, thus net satisfaction stands at positive 21 percentage points. The mean score is 3.3 marks, meaning in between “half-half” and “quite satisfied”. The average rating registered for the Budget was 60.2 marks. Meanwhile, 36% were satisfied with the government's strategy in monetary arrangement, whereas 37% were dissatisfied, thus net satisfaction stands at negative 1 percentage point. The mean score is 2.9 marks, meaning close to “half-half” in general.
On the other hand, 49% of the respondents thought that the relief measures suggested by the Financial Secretary are enough, 45% thought the opposite. Meanwhile, Financial Secretary suggested providing support measures to small and medium enterprises (SMEs) in order to boost the economy, 49% thought these measures are enough, 33% thought the opposite. According to the Financial Secretary’s saying, “tension and turbulence are mounting in Hong Kong, we need to look squarely at the problems and have the determination to resolve these conflicts”, 69% supported this view while 13% opposed. Besides, 43% of the respondents agreed to the saying that the budget plan mainly benefits the middle class, while 27% disagreed to it.
With respect to Hong Kong’s tax system, 61% considered it fair, whilst 28% thought the opposite. Last of all, 26% perceived the distribution of wealth in Hong Kong reasonable, as contrast to 62% who regarded it unreasonable.
Commentary
Frank Lee, Research Manager of Public Opinion Programme, observed, “Over the years, we find people’s receptiveness of the government’s Budget drops in our follow-up surveys after it has been debated for some time. The situation this year is that people’s initial appraisal of the Budget can be considered positive, with a net satisfaction of positive 17 percentage points. After one to two days’ media widespread coverage, the reaction became even more positive, net satisfaction rate went up significantly to positive 24 percentage points. However, three weeks later, it drops slightly to positive 21 percentage points. Satisfaction rating also drops slightly from 60.5 to 60.2 marks. In terms of specific policies, opinions are split on whether the relief measures suggested by the FS are enough or not, but people continue to think his suggestions to implement support measures to small and medium enterprises are enough, and agree that the budget plan mainly benefits the middle class. With respect to the Financial Secretary’s saying ‘tension and turbulence are mounting in Hong Kong, we need to look squarely at the problems and have the determination to resolve these conflicts’, nearly 70% agree to this saying. Finally, people continue to consider Hong Kong’s tax system as fair, but the distribution of wealth unreasonable. Meanwhile, 36% are satisfied with the government’s fiscal policies, 37% are dissatisfied, giving a net satisfaction of negative 1 percentage point which is the first negative value registered again since March 2014.”
Future Releases (Tentative)
- March 24, 2016 (Thursday) 1pm to 2pm: Trust and confidence indicators
- March 29, 2016 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and HKSAR Government
