HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack
Press Release on August 15, 2017
| Detailed Findings (Rating of Chief Executive Carrie Lam ) | Detailed Findings (Popularity of Principal Officials) |
Special Announcements
1. From July 2017, apart from sampling landline numbers to conduct opinion surveys, mobile numbers are also added to the sampling frame. Since it takes time to conduct further testing, the figures released today by The Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong are only based on the landline sample. The results of the mixed sample will be released after further testing is completed. Meanwhile, POP also enhanced the previous weighting method that has been used for quite a few years. Apart from age, gender and education, economic activity status is now also taken into account when adjusting data. 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 2016 year-end, the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and the economic activity status distribution collected in the 2011 Census.
2. 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 regular rating surveys of former CEs CH Tung, Donald Tsang and CY Leung, along with related demographics of respondents. POP today releases the raw data of the third CE rating survey of Carrie Lam after she took office. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.
Abstract
POP interviewed 817 Hong Kong people between 2 and 7 August, 2017 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam has slightly increased by 0.5 mark to 59.0. Her latest approval rate is 52%, disapproval rate 37%, giving a net popularity of positive 15 percentage points, which did not change much over the past two weeks. As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Matthew Cheung is 56.2 marks. His approval rate is 37%, disapproval rate 16%, giving a net popularity of positive 21 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS Paul Chan is 41.2 marks, approval rate 25%, disapproval rate 44%, thus a net popularity of negative 19 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 50.9 marks, approval rate 38%, disapproval rate 23%, giving a net popularity of positive 15 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating and net approval rate, Matthew Cheung continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department. As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rate of 1 among 13 Directors has gone up, while 11 have gone down and 1 remains unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong and Secretary for Security John Lee register significant changes in their net approval rates, down by 20 and 6 percentage points respectively. Among all the Directors, only Lau Kong-wah registers negative popularity, at negative 3 percentage points. Edward Yau is currently the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 35 percentage points. According to POP’s standard, no one falls under the category of “ideal” performer, Carrie Lam falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of Wong Kam-sing, Rimsky Yuen, Matthew Cheung, Kevin Yeung, Lau Kong-wah and Paul Chan can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Edward Yau, Sophia Chan, Joshua Law, Law Chi-kwong, John Lee, Frank Chan, Nicholas Yang, James Lau, Michael Wong and Patrick Nip can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. No one falls into the category of “depressing” or “disastrous”. The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-5 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 71%.
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 817 successful interviews, not 817 x 70.9% 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 +/-2.3, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-5%, 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 Carrie Lam and various Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system. From July 2017, POP enhanced the previous weighting method that has been used for quite a few years. Apart from age, gender and education, economic activity status is now also taken into account when adjusting data. 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 2016 year-end, the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and the economic activity status distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey excluding the 199 testing samples using mobile numbers:
|
Date of survey |
Overall sample size |
Response rate |
Maximum sampling error of percentages[6] |
|
2-7/8/2017 |
817 |
70.9% |
+/-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) |
|
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 Carrie Lam are summarized as follows:
|
Date of survey |
22-25/5/17 |
5-8/6/17 |
19-22/6/17 |
3-6/7/17 |
17-20/7/17 |
2-7/8/17 |
Latest change |
|
Sample base |
1,003 |
1,036 |
1,007 |
832 |
817 |
817 |
-- |
|
Overall response rate |
69.7% |
69.4% |
71.2% |
71.5% |
71.6% |
70.9% |
-- |
|
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding and error [8] |
-- |
|
Rating of CE Carrie Lam |
54.0[9] |
54.7 |
52.2[9] |
63.7[9] |
58.5[9] |
59.0+/-1.9 |
+0.5 |
|
Vote of confidence in CE Carrie Lam |
46% |
49% |
45%[9] |
52%[9] |
50% |
52+/-4% |
+2% |
|
Vote of no confidence in CE Carrie Lam |
45% |
44% |
41% |
34%[9] |
35% |
37+/-3% |
+2% |
|
Net approval rate |
<1% |
6% |
4% |
19%[9] |
15% |
15+/-7% |
-- |
[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 +/-1.9, 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.
[9] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level, 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 |
6-10/3/17 |
3-6/4/17 |
8-11/5/17 |
5-8/6/17 |
3-6/7/17 |
2-7/8/17 |
Latest change |
|
Sample base[10] |
497-688 |
571-601 |
542-624 |
633-668 |
484-557 |
613-638 |
-- |
|
Overall response rate |
69.8% |
73.1% |
72.1% |
69.4% |
71.5% |
70.9% |
-- |
|
Latest finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding & error [11] |
-- |
|
Rating of CS Matthew Cheung |
52.5[12] |
51.3 |
55.3[12] |
49.3[12] |
57.6[12] |
56.2+/-1.9 |
-1.4 |
|
Vote of confidence in
|
28% |
31% |
35% |
26%[12] |
39%[12] |
37+/-4% |
-2% |
|
Vote of no confidence in
|
15% |
17% |
18% |
18% |
18% |
16+/-3% |
-2% |
|
Net approval rate |
13% |
14% |
17% |
8%[12] |
21%[12] |
21+/-6% |
-- |
|
Rating of FS Paul Chan |
38.0[12] |
37.2 |
39.7[12] |
34.1[12] |
40.5[12] |
41.2+/-2.3 |
+0.7 |
|
Vote of confidence in FS Paul Chan |
21%[12] |
16%[12] |
21%[12] |
18% |
22%[12] |
25+/-4% |
+3% |
|
Vote of no confidence in FS Paul Chan |
44%[12] |
49%[12] |
49% |
48% |
41%[12] |
44+/-4% |
+3% |
|
Net approval rate |
-24%[12] |
-33%[12] |
-27% |
-30% |
-19%[12] |
-19+/-7% |
-- |
|
Rating of SJ Rimsky Yuen |
44.4 |
47.3[12] |
47.3 |
46.6 |
52.8[12] |
50.9+/-2.2 |
-1.9 |
|
Vote of confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen |
27% |
30% |
27% |
30% |
37%[12] |
38+/-4% |
+1% |
|
Vote of no confidence in SJ Rimsky Yuen |
34% |
30% |
32% |
30% |
23%[12] |
23+/-3% |
-- |
|
Net approval rate |
-7% |
-1% |
-5% |
-1% |
14%[12] |
15+/-6% |
+1% |
[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.
[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 +/-2.3, 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.
[12] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level, 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 |
5-8/6/17 |
3-6/7/17 |
2-7/8/17 |
Latest change |
|||
|
Sample base [13] |
591-655 |
491-544 |
457-522 |
-- |
|||
|
Overall response rate |
69.4% |
71.5% |
70.9% |
-- |
|||
|
Sample base for each question /
|
Base |
% |
Base |
% |
Base |
% &
|
-- |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau |
-- |
-- |
517 |
48% |
479 |
42+/-5% |
-6%[15] |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau |
-- |
-- |
517 |
7% |
479 |
7+/-2% |
-- |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
517 |
41% |
479 |
35+/-6% |
-6% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan |
-- |
-- |
517 |
42% |
496 |
40+/-4% |
-2% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan |
-- |
-- |
517 |
3% |
496 |
7+/-2% |
+4%[15] |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
517 |
38% |
496 |
34+/-5% |
-4% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law |
-- |
-- |
524 |
43% |
511 |
39+/-4% |
-4% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law |
-- |
-- |
524 |
8% |
511 |
5+/-2% |
-3%[15] |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
524 |
35% |
511 |
33+/-5% |
-2% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong |
-- |
-- |
544 |
52% |
495 |
34+/-4% |
-18%[15] |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong |
-- |
-- |
544 |
8% |
495 |
10+/-3% |
+2% |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
544 |
44% |
495 |
24+/-6%[17] |
-20%[15] |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing |
591 |
38% |
491 |
45%[15] |
457 |
41+/-5% |
-4% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing |
591 |
18%[15] |
491 |
17% |
457 |
18+/-4% |
+1% |
|
Net approval rate |
591 |
20% |
491 |
28%[15] [16] |
457 |
24+/-7%[17] |
-4% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security John Lee |
-- |
-- |
494 |
34% |
522 |
31+/-4% |
-3% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security John Lee |
-- |
-- |
494 |
7% |
522 |
9+/-3% |
+2% |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
494 |
28%[16] |
522 |
22+/-5% |
-6%[15] |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan |
-- |
-- |
492 |
25% |
458 |
30+/-4% |
+5%[15] |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan |
-- |
-- |
492 |
6% |
458 |
12+/-3% |
+6%[15] |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
492 |
18% |
458 |
18+/-6% |
-- |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau |
-- |
-- |
499 |
24% |
484 |
23+/-4% |
-1% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau |
-- |
-- |
499 |
6% |
484 |
7+/-2% |
+1% |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
499 |
19% |
484 |
16+/-5% |
-3% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Michael Wong |
-- |
-- |
502 |
28% |
489 |
23+/-4% |
-5%[15] |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Michael Wong |
-- |
-- |
502 |
8% |
489 |
7+/-2% |
-1% |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
502 |
20% |
489 |
15+/-5%[18] |
-5% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung |
-- |
-- |
531 |
30% |
480 |
33+/-4% |
+3% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung |
-- |
-- |
531 |
9% |
480 |
18+/-4% |
+9%[15] |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
531 |
21% |
480 |
15+/-6%[18] |
-6% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip |
-- |
-- |
496 |
22% |
482 |
21+/-4% |
-1% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip |
-- |
-- |
496 |
7% |
482 |
11+/-3% |
+4%[15] |
|
Net approval rate |
-- |
-- |
496 |
15% |
482 |
10+/-5% |
-5% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang |
606 |
21% |
530 |
28%[15] |
478 |
27+/-4% |
-1% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang |
606 |
25% |
530 |
19%[15] |
478 |
20+/-4% |
+1% |
|
Net approval rate |
606 |
-5% |
530 |
9%[15] |
478 |
8+/-6% |
-1% |
|
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah |
640 |
23% |
508 |
29%[15] |
508 |
31+/-4% |
+2% |
|
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah |
640 |
48% |
508 |
39%[15] |
508 |
34+/-4% |
-5%[15] |
|
Net approval rate |
640 |
-25% |
508 |
-10%[15] |
508 |
-3+/-7% |
+7% |
[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 +/-5% 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, 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 July, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing and Secretary for Security John Lee are 27.8 and 27.6 percentage points. Thus, they ranked fifth and sixth.
[17] Based on the figures of latest survey, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong and Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing are 24.4 and 23.7 percentage points. Thus, they ranked fourth and fifth this time.
[18] Based on the figures of latest survey, in two decimal places, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for Development Michael Wong and Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung are 15.34 and 15.28 percentage points. Thus, they ranked ninth and tenth this time.
The latest survey showed that, CE Carrie Lam scored 59.0 marks, and 52% supported her as CE, her net approval rate is positive 15 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Matthew Cheung, FS Paul Chan and SJ Rimsky Yuen were 56.2, 41.2 and 50.9 marks, and 37%, 25% and 38% would vote for their reappointments correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 21, negative 19 and positive 15 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 Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau, attaining positive 35 percentage points. The 2nd and 3rd places belong to Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan and Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law with net approval rates of positive 34 and positive 33 percentage points respectively. Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Security John Lee, Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau, Secretary for Development Michael Wong, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip, Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang and Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah ranked 4th to 13th, their corresponding net approval rates are positive 24, positive 24, positive 22, positive 18, positive 16, positive 15, positive 15, positive 10, positive 8 and negative 3 percentage points. In other words, no Director scored a net approval rate of over 50%.
Opinion Daily
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 3 to 6 July, 2017 while this survey was conducted from 2 to 7 August, 2017. 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.
|
1/8/17 |
Chief Executive’s Office appoints secretaries and political assistants. |
|
28/7/17 |
The Transport and Housing Bureau announces the statistics of private housing supply in the primary market. |
|
25/7/17 |
The government announces the co-location arrangement for the Express Rail Link. |
|
22/7/17 |
Hong Kong Police announces the latest trend of employment fraud. |
|
19/7/17 |
The Legislative Council Finance Committee approves the funding request of $3.6 billion for new educational resources. |
|
15/7/17 |
Edward Yiu, Nathan Law, Leung Kwok-hung and Lau Siu Lai attempt to enter the meeting room of the Finance Committee. |
|
14/7/17 |
The High Court disqualifies four lawmakers from the Legislative Council. |
|
12/7/17 |
Media reports on the DSE results announcement. |
Commentary
Note: The following commentary was written by Senior Data Analyst of POP, Edward Tai.
Our latest survey conducted in early August shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam has slightly increased by 0.5 mark to 59.0. Her latest approval rate is 52%, disapproval rate 37%, giving a net popularity of positive 15 percentage points, which did not change much over the past two weeks.
As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Matthew Cheung is 56.2 marks. His approval rate is 37%, disapproval rate 16%, giving a net popularity of positive 21 percentage points. The latest support rating of FS Paul Chan is 41.2 marks, approval rate 25%, disapproval rate 44%, thus a net popularity of negative 19 percentage points. As for SJ Rimsky Yuen, his support rating is 50.9 marks, approval rate 38%, disapproval rate 23%, giving a net popularity of positive 15 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating and net approval rate, Matthew Cheung continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department.
As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rate of 1 among 13 Directors has gone up, while 11 have gone down and 1 remains unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong and Secretary for Security John Lee register significant changes in their net approval rates, down by 20 and 6 percentage points respectively. Among all the Directors, only Lau Kong-wah registers negative popularity, at negative 3 percentage points. Edward Yau is currently the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 35 percentage points.
According to POP’s standard, no one falls under the category of “ideal” performer, Carrie Lam falls under the category of “successful” performer. The performance of Wong Kam-sing, Rimsky Yuen, Matthew Cheung, Kevin Yeung, Lau Kong-wah and Paul Chan can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Edward Yau, Sophia Chan, Joshua Law, Law Chi-kwong, John Lee, Frank Chan, Nicholas Yang, James Lau, Michael Wong and Patrick Nip can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. No one falls into the category of “depressing” or “disastrous”.
The following table summarizes the grading of CE Carrie Lam and the principal officials for readers’ easy reference:
|
“Ideal”: those with approval rates of over 66%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets |
|
“Successful”: those with approval rates of over 50%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets |
|
CE Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (52%) |
|
“Mediocre”: those not belonging to other 5 types; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets |
|
Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing (41%); SJ Rimsky Yuen Kwok-keung (38%); CS Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (37%); Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung (33%); Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah (31%); FS Paul Chan Mo-po (25%) |
|
|
|
“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 Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau Tang-wah (42%, 50%)[19]; Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan Siu-chee (40%, 47%); Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law Chi-kong (39%, 44%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong (34%, 43%); Secretary for Security John Lee Ka-chiu (31%, 40%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan Fan (30%, 42%); Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang Wei-hsiung (27%, 47%); Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Henry Lau Jr (23%, 31%)[20]; Secretary for Development Michael Wong Wai-lun (23%, 30%) [20]; Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip Tak-kuen (21%, 32%) |
|
|
|
“Depressing”: those with disapproval rates of over 50%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets |
|
“Disastrous”: those with disapproval rates of over 66%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets |
[19] In one decimal place, the recognition rate of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau Tang-wah is 49.8%.
[20] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Henry Lau Jr and Secretary for Development Michael Wong Wai-lun are 23.2% and 22.6%.
Future Release (Tentative)
