HKU POP SITE releases popularity figures of CE Donald Tsang, Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux under the accountability systemBack

 
Press Release on September 7, 2010

| Abstract | Latest Figures | Opinion Daily | Commentary | Future Release (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (Popularity of Chief Executive/Popularity of Principal Officials) |


Abstract

The Public Opinion Prgramme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong interviewed 1,010 Hong Kong people between August 31 and September 3 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that after the Manila hostage incident, the popularity of the CE and most principal officials have gone up. Compared to two weeks ago, the support rating of CE Donald Tsang has surged by 7.2 marks to reach 58.5, a record high in more than two years. His approval rate has also surged by 12 percentage points, switching his net popularity from negative to positive for the first time in 6 months. CE's net popularity now stands at positive 10 percentage points. For the Secretaries of Departments, compared to one month ago, the popularity of CS Henry Tang, FS John Tsang and SJ Wong Yan-lung have all gone up. Among them, Henry Tang's rating is at record high in two years, as his approval rate surged 13 percentage points to reach an over 50% level. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 43, John Tsang positive 36 and Wong Yan-lung positive 56 percentage points respectively. Wong Yan-lung remains to be the most popular Secretary of Department. As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the approval rates of 8 among 12 Directors have gone up, 2 have gone down and 2 remained unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau, Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung have changed beyond sampling error, up by 7, 5 and 5 percentage points respectively. No Secretary or Director registers negative popularity, meaning that one's disapproval rate is higher than the approval rate. According to POP's standard, Ambrose Lee falls under the category of "ideal" performance. Wong Yan-lung, Henry Tang, Matthew Cheung, York Chow, John Tsang and Carrie Lam now fall under the category of "successful". Donald Tsang, Eva Cheng, Edward Yau, Michael Suen, Tsang Tak-sing and Stephen Lam can be labeled as "mediocre". Denise Yue, Ceajer Chan and Rita Lau can be labeled as "inconspicuous". No official falls under the category of "depressing" or "disastrous". Government officials should make use of this opportunity to get close to the people to help them solve their problems, even when the crisis is over. The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is between +/-2 and +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figures needs another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 65%.

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 1,010 successful interviews, not 1,010 x 65.2% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is between +/-2 and +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figures 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 various ratings not more than +/-1.2 and sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% at 95% confidence level".
[4] When quoting percentages of this survey, journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, but when quoting the rating figures, one decimal place can be used, in order to match the precision level of the figures.
[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 on schedule via POP SITE the latest popularity figures of CE Donald Tsang, Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system. All the figures have been weighted according to provisional figures obtained from the Census and Statistics Department regarding the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population in mid-2010. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:

Date of survey

Overall sample size

Response rate

Maximum sampling error of percentages[6]

31/8/10-3/9/10

1,010

65.2%

+/-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 are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.

As different questions involve different sub-samples, the sample 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.

"Maximum sampling errors" occur when survey figures are close to 50%. If the figures are close to 0% or 100%, the sampling error will diminish accordingly. The sampling errors of ratings, however, will depend on the distribution of the raw figures. Since January 2007, POP lists out the sampling errors of all survey figures in detail and explain them in due course. Recent popularity figures of CE Donald Tsang are summarized as follows:

Date of survey

5-8/7/10

19-21/7/10

2-6/8/10

17-20/8/10

31/8/10-3/9/10

Latest Change

Sample base

1,022

1,007

1,005

1,006

1,010

--

Overall response rate

63.6%

66.2%

65.8%

64.4%

65.2%

--

Latest finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[8]

--

Rating of CE Donald Tsang

49.9

50.3

50.6

51.3

58.5+/-1.2

+7.2[9]

Vote of confidence in CE Donald Tsang

32%

35%

30%[9]

35%[9]

47+/-3%

+12%[9]

Vote of no confidence in CE Donald Tsang

52%

50%

51%

49%

37+/-3%

-12%[9]

[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 +/-1.2, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3% 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.


Figures on the latest popularity ratings of the three Secretaries of Departments under the accountability system are summarized below:

Date of survey

30/4-6/5/10

1-3/6/10

5-8/7/10

2-6/8/10

31/8/10-3/9/10

Latest Change[10]

Sample base

1,031

1,010

1,022

1,005

1,010

--

Overall response rate

72.4%

67.9%

63.6%

65.8%

65.2%

--

Latest finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[11]

--

Ratings of CS Henry Tang

51.8

51.3

51.3

52.5

58.5+/-1.1

+6.0[12]

Vote of confidence in CS Henry Tang

42%

40%

39%

41%

54+/-3%

+13%[12]

Vote of no confidence in CS Henry Tang

18%

20%

23%

18%[12]

11+/-2%

-7%[12]

Ratings of FS John Tsang

53.1[12]

54.0

53.5

55.5[12]

57.6+/-1.1

+2.1[12]

Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang

49%[12]

48%

48%

53%[12]

52+/-3%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang

20%

19%

19%

14%[12]

16+/-2%

+2%

Ratings of SJ Y.L. Wong

58.9

59.7

59.7

59.0

60.7+/-1.1

+1.7[12]

Vote of confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong

62%

62%

64%

59%[12]

63+/-3%

+4%[12]

Vote of no confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong

6%

6%

8%

8%

7+/-2%

-1%

[10] The frequency of this series of questions is different for different questions, and also different from that of CE popularity ratings. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals.
[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 +/-1.1, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3% 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.


Figures on the latest popularity ratings of Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system are summarized below:

Date of survey

1-3/6/2010

5-8/7/10

2-6/8/10

Latest Change

Total sample size[13]

1,010

1,022

1,005

--

Overall response rate

67.9%

63.6%

65.8%

--

Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer

Base

%

Base

%

Base

%& error[14]

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee

537

63%

542

66%

525

71+/-4%

+5%[15]

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee

537

10%

542

7%[15]

525

7+/-2%

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung

529

51%

564

49%

523

54+/-4%

+5%[15]

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung

529

12%

564

11%

523

12+/-3%

+1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow

555

44%

521

53%[15]

535

52+/-4%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow

555

30%

521

25%[15]

535

23+/-4%

-2%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam

534

48%

588

48%

530

51+/-4%

+3%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam

534

16%

588

19%

530

11+/-3%

-8%[15]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng

527

43%

531

41%

532

44+/-4%

+3%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng

527

22%

531

22%

532

20+/-3%

-2%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau

553

38%

606

36%

523

37+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau

553

19%

606

21%

523

22+/-4%

+1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue

551

36%

551

32%

519

36+/-4%

+4%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue

551

15%

551

12%

519

10+/-3%

-2%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen

539

32%

532

35%

518

35+/-4%

--

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen

539

37%

532

34%

518

32+/-4%

-2%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan

534

31%

534

34%

539

34+/-4%

--

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan

534

13%

534

11%

539

12+/-3%

+1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau

530

28%

530

26%

522

33+/-4%

+7%[15]

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau

530

17%[15]

530

16%

522

11+/-3%

-5%[15]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing[16]

530

24%[15]

530

33%[15]

517

32+/-4%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing

530

36%

530

29%[15]

517

26+/-4%

-3%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam[16]

593

29%

593

31%

534

32+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam

593

37%

593

34%

534

29+/-4%

-5%[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% 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] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing is 32.5%, while that of Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam is 31.7%.


The latest survey showed that, CE Donald Tsang scored 58.5 marks, and 47% supported him as the Chief Executive. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Henry Tang, FS John Tsang and SJ Wong Yan-lung were 58.5, 57.6 and 60.7 marks and 54%, 52% and 63% would vote for their reappointment correspondingly.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, results revealed that the top approval rate fell to Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee, attaining 71%. The 2nd to 4th places belonged to Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung, Secretary for Food and Health York Chow and Secretary for Development Carrie Lam, with approval rate 54%, 52% and 51% respectively. Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng, Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue, Secretary for Education Michael Suen, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam ranked 5th to 12th, as they gained 44%, 37%, 36%, 35%, 34%, 33%, 32% and 32% support from the public respectively. In other words, only Ambrose Lee, Matthew Cheung, York Chow and Carrie Lam scored 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 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 August 2 to 6, 2010 while this survey was conducted from August 31 to September 3, 2010. 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.

31/8/10

Kerry Properties Limited succeeds in bidding a piece of land in Kowloon Tong in a high price.

30/8/10

Provisional Minimum Wage Commission suggests the minimum wage to be set around $28-30 per hour.

29/8/10

People marched in silence to mourn the eight Hong Kong people who were killed in the Manila hostage incident.

25/8/10

The survivors and the victim's bodies of Hong Kong travel tour returned from Manila.

24/8/10

Many newspapers on the following day follow and discuss the hostage case of Hong Kong travel tour in Manila.

23/8/10

One Hong Kong travel tour was hostaged in Manila, ended up with eight tourists dead and seven injured.

20/8/10

Hong Kong government consults public about the three proposals of West Kowloon Cultural District.

14/8/10

HK baseball player was injured in Venezuela.

13/8/10

HKSAR Government launches new steps to cool property market.

12/8/10

6 banks sell personal data of their clients to other companies.

6/8/10

Bokhary's assault senetence goes to Court of Appeal.

4/8/10

Prudence Chan Pik-wah, CEO of Octopus, quits.



Commentary

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

Our latest survey shows that after the Manila hostage incident, the popularity of the CE and most principal officials have gone up. Compared to two weeks ago, the support rating of CE Donald Tsang has surged by 7.2 marks to reach 58.5, a record high in more than two years. His approval rate has also surged by 12 percentage points, switching his net popularity from negative to positive for the first time in 6 months. CE's net popularity now stands at positive 10 percentage points.

For the Secretaries of Departments, compared to one month ago, the popularity of CS Henry Tang, FS John Tsang and SJ Wong Yan-lung have all gone up. Among them, Henry Tang's rating is at record high in two years, as his approval rate surged 13 percentage points to reach an over 50% level. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 43, John Tsang positive 36 and Wong Yan-lung positive 56 percentage points respectively. Wong Yan-lung remains to be the most popular Secretary of Department.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the approval rates of 8 among 12 Directors have gone up, 2 have gone down and 2 remained unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau, Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung have changed beyond sampling error, up by 7, 5 and 5 percentage points respectively.

No Secretary or Director registers negative popularity, meaning that one's disapproval rate is higher than the approval rate.

According to POP's standard, Ambrose Lee falls under the category of "ideal" performance. Wong Yan-lung, Henry Tang, Matthew Cheung, York Chow, John Tsang and Carrie Lam now fall under the category of "successful". Donald Tsang, Eva Cheng, Edward Yau, Michael Suen, Tsang Tak-sing and Stephen Lam can be labeled as "mediocre". Denise Yue, Ceajer Chan and Rita Lau can be labeled as "inconspicuous". No official falls under the category of "depressing" or "disastrous". Government officials should make use of this opportunity to get close to the people to help them solve their problems, even when the crisis is over.

The following table summarizes the grading of 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 Security Ambrose Lee Siu-kwong (71%)

 

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

SJ Wong Yan-lung (63%); CS Henry Tang Ying-yen (54%[17]); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (54%[17]); Secretary for Food and Health York Chow Yat-ngok (52%[17]); FS John Tsang Chun-wah (52%[17]); Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (51%)

 

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

CE Donald Tsang Yam-kuen (47%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng Yu-wah (44%); Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau Tang-wah (37%); Secretary for Education Michael Suen Ming-yeung (35%); Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (32%[17]); Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung (32%[17])

 

"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 Denise Yue Chung-yee (36%, 46%); Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan Ka-keung (34%, 46%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau Ng Wai-lan (33%, 44%)

 

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

None

 

"Disastrous": those with disapproval rates of over 66%; ranked by their disapproval rates

None

[17] In one decimal place, the approval rates of CS Henry Tang Ying-yen and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung are 54.5% and 54.2% respectively; the approval rates of Secretary for Food and Health York Chow Yat-ngok and FS John Tsang Chun-wah are 52.2% and 52.0% respectively; the approval rates of Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung are 32.5% and 31.7% respectively.


Future Release (Tentative)

  • September 14, 2010 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Media Performance

| Abstract | Latest Figures | Opinion Daily | Commentary | Future Release (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (Popularity of Chief Executive/Popularity of Principal Officials) |