HKU POP SITE releases POP-NOW surveyon political reform for the seventh timeBack

Since its establishment in 1991, the Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong has been conducting different types of opinion studies on social and political issues, as well as providing research services for different organizations, on condition that POP would design and conduct all studies independently, and could also release the findings for public consumption. In November 2009, POP came into agreement with the "now News Channel" for a project called "Joint Public Opinion Research Project on Political Reform". The main objective of the project is to demonstrate, by focusing on ongoing discussions of political reform, how independent research institute and professional news media investigate, analyze, report and comment on public opinion, including the explanation and promotion of professional ethics of opinion studies. The project comprises conducting regular and ad-hoc opinion surveys and other public opinion studies after the launching of public consultation by the government. The survey results will first be released in the "now News Channel", followed by POP press releases for public consumption. "now News Channel" agrees to POP uploading these programmes to the POP Site for public education, while POP agrees that "now News Channel" uses these findings for productions without POP's involvement. There has been a total of sixth releases of survey findings from December 2009 to February 2010. Today we release the results of our latest survey. Please cite the source of the figures when using them.

With respect to the Government's proposal of Chief Executive election in 2012, the question we used was: "It is proposed that the representatives of Election Committee should be increased from 800 to 1200 with around 100 representatives returned through election by elected District Council members from among themselves. Besides, every 150 Committee members can nominate 1 Chief Executive candidate, that is, the nomination threshold is set at the ratio of one-eighth of the total membership of the Election Committee." Results showed that 42% of the respondents supported and 29% opposed this proposal. As for the Government's proposal on the Legislative Council election in 2012, the question wordings used in this survey were: "It is proposed that there should be 5 more seats of geographical constituencies and 5 more seats of functional constituencies which are returned through election by elected District Council members from among themselves, while existing functional seats remain unchanged." Results showed that this proposal attained a support rate of 39%, versus 33% opposition. The mean quantified scores for both questions are 3.1 and 3.0 respectively, which means "half-half". Regarding the retention or abolition of the Legislative Council functional constituencies, 49% of the respondents think that the issue should be discussed before the political reform proposal is approved. 32% think the issue should be discussed after passing the political reform proposal. Latest findings of other survey questions are as follows:

Results showed that 26% supported the resignation of the five legislative councilors from Civic Party and League of Social Democrats to induce a de-facto referendum on public support towards the political reform proposals, 58% opposed it. The mean quantified score is 2.4, which means "quite oppose". As for the Legislative Council by-election to be held on May 16, if the seat in one's district will not be uncontested, 51% of all registered voters said that they would vote that day, 39% said they would not.

Note: The following commentary is extracted and enhanced from the comments made by the Director of Public Opinion Programme Dr Robert Chung on March 29, 2010 in the "now News Channel" programme "News Magazine", in the "now Survey on Political Reform" segment. Some questions and answers are provided by POP.

Q: There is not much change in the survey results, is there a problem in the survey design? How should we interpret the results?

A: We have been using the same research method for almost 20 years. As all the survey reports are open for public consumption, we welcome all skeptics to examine our methodology. We have full confidence in the scientific standard and professionalism of our research.

Q: Since the scientific standard and reliability of the survey is not a problem, how should we interpret the contradictory findings of low support of referendum but high voting propensity?

A: Since the nomination period of by-election has already started, we naturally need to monitor the voting propensity of the registered voters. Among the 1,000+ respondents, more than 800 are registered voters. On the assumption that the seats will be contested, but without knowing the exact list of candidates, we asked registered voters whether they would turn out to vote. The voting propensity of 51% seems high, but compared to previous surveys, it is actually rather low. Usually at the beginning of campaigns, voting propensity tends to be more than 60%, sometimes 70%, and climbs to near 80% right before the election. There are many factors affecting the conversion of voting propensity into actual turnout rate. Based on previous experiences, the conversion rate could be half to two-thirds. In other words, using 51% as the base, half of it is around 25%, and two-thirds of it would be around 35%. Projecting the turnout rate using the current figure therefore gives a turnout rate of around 25% to 35%. The voting propensity rate is now higher than the referendum support rate, meaning that some voters would still vote despite their opposition to the de-facto referendum.

Q: For those who oppose the referendum but would still vote, does it mean that they would cast blank votes?

A: At the moment, nobody has come out to call for blank votes, but if that really happens, it could push up the turnout rate a bit, but not the actual votes of the candidates. Blank votes may have two meanings: People do not support the candidates but still cast blank votes just to fulfill their civic responsibility. Another possible meaning is that they do not support the referendum campaign, but still want to exercise their political rights, so they cast blank votes to discredit the campaign.

Q: Results show many people oppose the referendum campaign while voting at the same time. This group of people is very important to the referendum campaigners. If this group continues to grow, does it mean the referendum campaign is a success?

A: We need to count on results of exit polls to pin down the actual relationship between voting and support for referendum. Suppose the turnout rate is high, but there are lots of blank votes, that may mean many people oppose the referendum campaign. In fact, even within the democratic camp, some support but some oppose the referendum campaign. They may vote simply out of their demand for more democracy. In the coming by-election, the relationship between voting and the referendum campaign may be more important than the election result itself.

Q: From the perspective of elector mobilization, if the democrats can jack up the turnout rate, can we say that the referendum campaign is a success?

A: The results can be interpreted differently by different people. I can think of three perspectives: Referendum campaigners would consider the campaign a success if the turnout rate is high. Whether it would pass their self-defined benchmark is another challenge. The Government as an independent election organizer should be glad to see a high turnout rate. The Government would be smashing its own face if it wants to show the drawbacks of the by-election system with a low turnout rate. From the perspective of those who oppose the referendum campaign, a high percentage of blank votes would also highlight their dissatisfaction. On the contrary, boycotting the referendum campaign by refusing to open polling stations is a backward step to democracy.

Q: All survey items show no significant change, what does that mean?

A: After so many months, there is little change in opinion regarding the election methods of the CE and LegCo members, the demand for discussing functional constituencies, and even the appraisal of de-facto referendum. This means insufficient discussions on the constitutional reform proposals, and a failure of the consultation process.