HKU POP SITE releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

Press Release on October 12, 2010

Special Announcement

As in previous years, Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong will conduct an instant survey after the Chief Executive delivers his policy address tomorrow. Results will be announced the following day (October 14). Then, POP will immediately conduct a follow-up survey, and the results will be announced on next Tuesday (October 19).

Abstract

POP interviewed 1,014 Hong Kong people between October 5 and 8 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that the popularity figures of CE Donald Tsang recede again after their big jump registered subsequent to the Manila hostage incident. Compared to two weeks ago, the support rating of CE Donald Tsang has significantly gone down by 2.5 marks to 55.4, while his disapproval rate has gone up significantly by 4 percentage points, switching his net popularity from positive to negative again. CE's net popularity now stands at negative 1 percentage point. 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 receded. Among them, Henry Tang registered the biggest fall. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 32, John Tsang positive 33 and Wong Yan-lung positive 52 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 6 among 12 Directors have gone down, 4 have gone up and 2 remained unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Food and Health York Chow and Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng have changed beyond sampling error, down by 7, 6 and 6 percentage points respectively. Among the Directors of Bureaux, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam and Secretary for Education Michael Suen register negative popularity, meaning that their disapproval rates are higher than their approval rates. Their net popularity figures now stand at negative 9, negative 5 and negative 2 percentage points respectively. According to POP's standard, Ambrose Lee falls under the category of "ideal" performance. Wong Yan-lung, Matthew Cheung and Carrie Lam now fall under the category of "successful". John Tsang, Henry Tang, York Chow, Donald Tsang, Denise Yue, Eva Cheng, Edward Yau, Michael Suen, Stephen Lam and Tsang Tak-sing can be labeled as "mediocre". Ceajer Chan and Rita Lau can be labeled as "inconspicuous". No official falls under the category of "depressing" or "disastrous". Boosted by the Manila hostage incident but then drawn back by controversies over the application of hosting the Asian Games and the expansion of landfill, the popularity of the SAR Government is still far from secure. Exactly how the public will react to CE's policy address to be delivered tomorrow, will have a direct effect on its future governance. 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 60%.

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 1,014 successful interviews, not 1,014 x 60.0% 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]
5-8/10/10	1,014	60.0%	+/-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)
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	2-6/8/10	17-20/8/10	31/8-3/9/10	18-24/9/10	5-8/10/10	Latest Change
Sample base	1,005	1,006	1,010	1,010	1,014	--
Overall response rate	65.8%	64.4%	65.2%	66.2%	60.0%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[8]	--
Rating of CE Donald Tsang	50.6	51.3	58.5^[9]	57.9	55.4+/-1.2	-2.5^[9]
Vote of confidence in CE Donald Tsang	30%^[9]	35%^[9]	47%^[9]	44%	42+/-3%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in CE Donald Tsang	51%	49%	37%^[9]	39%	43+/-3%	+4%^[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	1-3/6/10	5-8/7/10	2-6/8/10	31/8-3/9/10	5-8/10/10	Latest Change^[10]
Sample base	1,010	1,022	1,005	1,010	1,014	--
Overall response rate	67.9%	63.6%	65.8%	65.2%	60.0%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[11]	--
Ratings of CS Henry Tang	51.3	51.3	52.5	58.5^[12]	56.2+/-1.1	-2.3^[12]
Vote of confidence in CS Henry Tang	40%	39%	41%	54%^[12]	49+/-3%	-5%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in CS Henry Tang	20%	23%	18%^[12]	11%^[12]	17+/-2%	+6%^[12]
Ratings of FS John Tsang	54.0	53.5	55.5^[12]	57.6^[12]	56.3+/-1.2	-1.3^[12]
Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang	48%	48%	53%^[12]	52%	50+/-3%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang	19%	19%	14%^[12]	16%	17+/-2%	+1%
Ratings of SJ Y.L. Wong	59.7	59.7	59.0	60.7^[12]	60.0+/-1.1	-0.7
Vote of confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong	62%	64%	59%^[12]	63%^[12]	61+/-3%	-2%
Vote of no confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong	6%	8%	8%	7%	9+/-2%	+2%

[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 +/-1.2, 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.
[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	2-6/8/10		31/8/10-3/9/10		5-8/10/10		Latest Change
Total sample size^[13]	1,005		1,010		1,014		--
Overall response rate	65.8%		65.2%		60.0%		--
Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer	Base	%	Base	%	Base	%& error^[14]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee	542	66%	525	71%^[15]	535	73+/-4%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee	542	7%^[15]	525	7%	535	8+/-2%	+1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	564	49%	523	54%^[15]	553	54+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	564	11%	523	12%	553	14+/-3%	+2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam	588	48%	530	51%	558	53+/-4%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam	588	19%	530	11%^[15]	558	17+/-3%	+6%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow	521	53%^[15]	535	52%	542	46+/-4%	-6%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow	521	25%^[15]	535	23%	542	31+/-4%	+8%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue	551	32%	519	36%	548	39+/-4%	+3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue	551	12%	519	10%	548	14+/-3%	+4%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng	531	41%	532	44%	575	38+/-4%	-6%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng	531	22%	532	20%	575	24+/-4%	+4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau^[16]	606	36%	523	37%	525	36+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau	606	21%	523	22%	525	25+/-4%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan^[16]	534	34%	539	34%	537	36+/-4%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	534	11%	539	12%	537	10+/-3%	-2%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen	532	35%	518	35%	534	35+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen	532	34%	518	32%	534	37+/-4%	+5%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam	593	31%	534	32%	560	31+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam	593	34%	534	29%^[15]	560	36+/-4%	+7%^[15]
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau	530	26%	522	33%^[15]	546	29+/-4%	-4%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau	530	16%	522	11%^[15]	546	14+/-3%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	530	33%^[15]	517	32%	533	25+/-4%	-7%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	530	29%^[15]	517	26%	533	34+/-4%	+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% 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 Environment is 36.5%, while that of Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan is 35.7%.

The latest survey showed that, CE Donald Tsang scored 55.4 marks, and 42% supported him as the Chief Executive. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Henry Tang, FS John Tsang and SJ Wong Yan-lung were 56.2, 56.3 and 60.0 marks, and 49%, 50% and 61% 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 73%. The 2nd to 4th places belonged to Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung, Secretary for Development Carrie Lam and Secretary for Food and Health York Chow, with approval rate 54%, 53% and 46% respectively. Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue, Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng, Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan, Secretary for Education Michael Suen, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau and Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing ranked 5th to 12th, as they gained 39%, 38%, 36%, 36%, 35%, 31%, 29% and 25% support from the public respectively. In other words, only Ambrose Lee, Matthew Cheung and Carrie Lam scored approval rates 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 31 to September 3, 2010 while this survey was conducted from October 5 to 8. 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.

7/10/10	Many countries implement different policies to intervene foregin exchange market.
6/10/10	Government launches second stage public consultation on healthcare reform.
2/10/10	Travel Industry Council implements a new system to manage the discipline of travel agents.
29/9/10	A government land auction for Chai Wan site is withdrawn for the first time in 16 years.
24/9/10	Captain Zhan is finally released after a 17-days detention by Japan.
21/9/10	HKSAR governmnet consults public about the application of hosting Asian Games and Asian Para Games 2023.
20/9/10	Many newspapers report the follow-up of the Manila hostage incident.
17/9/10	Protests against Japan are launched in different Chinese cities due to the sovereignty of Diaoyu Islands.
4/9/10	Travel Industry Council study new measure to regulate tour guides and travel agencies.
31/8/10	Kerry Properties Limited succeeds in bidding a piece of land in Kowloon Tong in a high price.

Commentary

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

Our latest survey shows that the popularity figures of CE Donald Tsang recede again after their big jump registered subsequent to the Manila hostage incident. Compared to two weeks ago, the support rating of CE Donald Tsang has significantly gone down by 2.5 marks to 55.4, while his disapproval rate has gone up significantly by 4 percentage points, switching his net popularity from positive to negative again. CE's net popularity now stands at negative 1 percentage point.

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 receded. Among them, Henry Tang registered the biggest fall. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 32, John Tsang positive 33 and Wong Yan-lung positive 52 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 6 among 12 Directors have gone down, 4 have gone up and 2 remained unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Food and Health York Chow and Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng have changed beyond sampling error, down by 7, 6 and 6 percentage points respectively.

Among the Directors of Bureaux, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam and Secretary for Education Michael Suen register negative popularity, meaning that their disapproval rates are higher than their approval rates. Their net popularity figures now stand at negative 9, negative 5 and negative 2 percentage points respectively.

According to POP's standard, Ambrose Lee falls under the category of "ideal" performance. Wong Yan-lung, Matthew Cheung and Carrie Lam now fall under the category of "successful". John Tsang, Henry Tang, York Chow, Donald Tsang, Denise Yue, Eva Cheng, Edward Yau, Michael Suen, Stephen Lam and Tsang Tak-sing can be labeled as "mediocre". Ceajer Chan and Rita Lau can be labeled as "inconspicuous". No official falls under the category of "depressing" or "disastrous".

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 (73%)

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

SJ Wong Yan-lung (61%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (54%); Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (53%)

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

FS John Tsang Chun-wah (50%); CS Henry Tang Ying-yen (49%); Secretary for Food and Health York Chow Yat-ngok (46%); CE Donald Tsang Yam-kuen (42%); Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue Chung-yee (39%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng Yu-wah (38%); Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau Tang-wah (36%); Secretary for Education Michael Suen Ming-yeung (35%); Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung (31%); Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (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 Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan Ka-keung (36%, 45%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau Ng Wai-lan (29%, 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

Boosted by the Manila hostage incident but then drawn back by controversies over the application of hosting the Asian Games and the expansion of landfill, the popularity of the SAR Government is still far from secure. Exactly how the public will react to CE's policy address to be delivered tomorrow, will have a direct effect on its future governance.

Future Releases (Tentative)

October 14, 2010 (Thursday) 1pm to 2pm: Instant poll on Policy Address
October 19, 2010 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Follow-up survey of Policy Address