HKU POP SITE releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

 
Press Release on November 9, 2010

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


Abstract

Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong interviewed 1,008 Hong Kong people between November 2 and 6 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that the support rating of CE Donald Tsang has further gone down by 1.2 marks to 52.7, close to the level registered before the Manila hostage incident two-and-a-half months ago. CE's net popularity now stands at negative 6 percentage points. For the Secretaries of Departments, compared to one month ago, the support ratings of CS Henry Tang and FS John Tsang have gone down by 1.7 and 1.1 marks respectively, while the support rating and approval rate of SJ Wong Yan-lung have remained stable. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 26, John Tsang positive 32 and Wong Yan-lung positive 53 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 7 among 12 Directors have gone down, 4 have gone up and 1 remained unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Food and Health York Chow has registered change in approval rates beyond sampling error, up by 6 percentage points, while those with changes in disapproval rates beyond sampling error include Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan, Food and Health York Chow and Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue with disapproval rates up by 5, 4, 4 percentage points and down by 5 and 4 percentage points respectively. Among the Directors of Bureaux, those with negative popularity, meaning that disapproval rates higher than their approval rates, include Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Education Michael Suen and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam. Their net popularity figures now stand at negative 4, negative 3 and negative 2 percentage points respectively. According to POP's standard, Ambrose Lee falls under the category of "ideal" performance. Wong Yan-lung, York Chow, Matthew Cheung and John Tsang now fall under the category of "successful". Carrie Lam, Henry Tang, Eva Cheng, Donald Tsang, Michael Suen, Edward Yau, Stephen Lam and Tsang Tak-sing 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". 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 64%.

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 1,008 successful interviews, not 1,008 x 64.1% 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 +/-1.3 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]

2-6/11/10

1,008

64.1%

+/-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

18-24/9/10

5-8/10/10

13/10/10[9]

26-30/10/10

2-6/11/10

Latest Change

Sample base

1,010

1,014

1,020

1,009

1,008

--

Overall response rate

66.2%

60.0%

66.9%

63.3%

64.1%

--

Latest finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[8]

--

Rating of CE Donald Tsang

57.9

55.4[10]

56.2

53.9[10]

52.7+/-1.3

-1.2

Vote of confidence in CE Donald Tsang

44%

42%

41%

39%

41+/-3%

+2%

Vote of no confidence in CE Donald Tsang

39%

43%[10]

41%

45%[10]

47+/-3%

+2%

[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 +/-1.3, 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] These questions only use sub-samples of the survey concerned. The sub-sample sizes of questions on CE's support rating and hypothetical voting were 581 and 563 respectively.
[10] 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

5-8/7/10

2-6/8/10

31/8-3/9/10

5-8/10/10

2-6/11/10

Latest Change[11]

Sample base

1,022

1,005

1,010

1,014

1,008

--

Overall response rate

63.6%

65.8%

65.2%

60.0%

64.1%

--

Latest finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[12]

--

Ratings of CS Henry Tang

51.3

52.5

58.5[13]

56.2[13]

54.5+/-1.2

-1.7[13]

Vote of confidence in CS Henry Tang

39%

41%

54%[13]

49%[13]

45+/-3%

-4%[13]

Vote of no confidence in CS Henry Tang

23%

18%[13]

11%[13]

17%[13]

19+/-2%

+2%

Ratings of FS John Tsang

53.5

55.5[13]

57.6[13]

56.3[13]

55.2+/-1.2

-1.1

Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang

48%

53%[13]

52%

50%

51+/-3%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang

19%

14%[13]

16%

17%

19+/-2%

+2%

Ratings of SJ Y.L. Wong

59.7

59.0

60.7[13]

60.0

60.0+/-1.1

--

Vote of confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong

64%

59%[13]

63%[13]

61%

61+/-3%

--

Vote of no confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong

8%

8%

7%

9%

8+/-2%

-1%

[11] 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.
[12] 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.
[13] 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

31/8/10-3/9/10

5-8/10/10

2-6/11/10

Latest Change

Total sample size[14]

1,010

1,014

1,008

--

Overall response rate

65.2%

60.0%

64.1%

--

Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer

Base

%

Base

%

Base

%& error[15]

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee

525

71%[16]

535

73%

524

71+/-4%

-2%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee

525

7%

535

8%

524

6+/-2%

-2%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow

535

52%

542

46%[16]

532

52+/-4%

+6%[16]

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

535

23%

542

31%[16]

532

26+/-4%

-5%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung

523

54%[16]

553

54%

544

51+/-4%

-3%

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

523

12%

553

14%

544

18+/-3%

+4%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam

530

51%

558

53%

528

49+/-4%

-4%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam

530

11%[16]

558

17%[16]

528

18+/-3%

+1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng

532

44%

575

38%[16]

527

42+/-4%

+4%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng

532

20%

575

24%

527

24+/-4%

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue

519

36%

548

39%

544

36+/-4%

-3%

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

519

10%

548

14%[16]

544

10+/-3%

-4%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen[17]

518

35%

534

35%

543

34+/-4%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen

518

32%

534

37%[16]

543

37+/-4%

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau[17]

523

37%

525

36%

523

34+/-4%

-2%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau

523

22%

525

25%

523

30+/-4%

+5%[16]

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

534

32%

560

31%

536

33+/-4%

+2%

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

534

29%[16]

560

36%[16]

536

35+/-4%

-1%

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

539

34%

537

36%

537

32+/-4%

-4%

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

539

12%

537

10%

537

14+/-3%

+4%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing[18]

517

32%

533

25%[16]

527

29+/-4%

+4%

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

517

26%

533

34%[16]

527

33+/-4%

-1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau[18]

522

33%[16]

546

29%

529

29+/-4%

--

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

522

11%[16]

546

14%

529

13+/-3%

-1%

[14] Starting from 2006, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.
[15] 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.
[16] 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.
[17] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Education Michael Suen is 34.5%, while that of Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau is 34.4%.
[18] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing is 29.3%, while that of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau is 28.7%.


The latest survey showed that, CE Donald Tsang scored 52.7 marks, and 41% supported him as the Chief Executive. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Henry Tang, FS John Tsang and SJ Wong Yan-lung were 54.5, 55.2 and 60.0 marks, and 45%, 51% 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 71%. The 2nd to 5th places belonged to Secretary for Food and Health York Chow, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung, Secretary for Development Carrie Lam and Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng, with approval rate 52%, 51%, 49% and 42% respectively. Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue, Secretary for Education Michael Suen, Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing and Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau ranked 6th to 12th, as they gained 36%, 34%, 34%, 33%, 32%, 29% and 29% support from the public respectively. In other words, only Ambrose Lee, York Chow and Matthew Cheung 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 October 5 to 8, 2010 while this survey was conducted from November 2 to 6, 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.

01/11/10

Monetary Authority warns that market adjustments will cause massive shocks.

23/10/10

Some Hong Kong youngsters expressed their concern towards the soaring prices in property market.

20/10/10

The world economy becomes volatile after China raised its rates.

18/10/10

The government proposes to tighten privacy laws and to make the unauthorised sale of personal data a criminal offence.

16/10/10

The sovereignty dispute over Diaoyu Islands triggered large-scale demonstrations in both China and Japan.

15/10/10

The government will establish new regulation to prevent developers from inflating the floor area of flats.

13/10/10

Hong Kong SAR Chief Executive Donald Tsang Yam-kuen delivered 2010 annual Policy Address.

12/10/10

Chinachem Group bids a site in Kowloon Tong for HK$1.63 billion.

11/10/10

No official is filed criminal charge in the investigation report of the hostage case of Hong Kong travel tour in Manila.

08/10/10

Beijing human rights activist Liu Xiaobo wins Nobel Peace Prize.

07/10/10

Many countries implement different policies to intervene foreign exchange market.

06/10/10

Government launches second stage public consultation on healthcare reform.



Commentary

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

Our latest survey shows that compared to the last survey, the support rating of CE Donald Tsang has further gone down by 1.2 marks to 52.7, close to the level registered before the Manila hostage incident two-and-a-half months ago. CE's net popularity now stands at negative 6 percentage points.

For the Secretaries of Departments, compared to one month ago, the support ratings of CS Henry Tang and FS John Tsang have gone down by 1.7 and 1.1 marks respectively, while the support rating and approval rate of SJ Wong Yan-lung have remained stable. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 26, John Tsang positive 32 and Wong Yan-lung positive 53 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 7 among 12 Directors have gone down, 4 have gone up and 1 remained unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Food and Health York Chow has registered change in approval rates beyond sampling error, up by 6 percentage points, while those with changes in disapproval rates beyond sampling error include Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan, Food and Health York Chow and Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue with disapproval rates up by 5, 4, 4 percentage points and down by 5 and 4 percentage points respectively.

Among the Directors of Bureaux, those with negative popularity, meaning that disapproval rates higher than their approval rates, include Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for Education Michael Suen and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam. Their net popularity figures now stand at negative 4, negative 3 and negative 2 percentage points respectively.

According to POP's standard, Ambrose Lee falls under the category of "ideal" performance. Wong Yan-lung, York Chow, Matthew Cheung and John Tsang now fall under the category of "successful". Carrie Lam, Henry Tang, Eva Cheng, Donald Tsang, Michael Suen, Edward Yau, Stephen Lam and Tsang Tak-sing 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". As for the reasons affecting the popularity change of these officials, readers can make their own judgment using detailed records shown in our "Opinion Daily" feature page.

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 (61%); Secretary for Food and Health York Chow Yat-ngok (52%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (51%[19]); FS John Tsang Chun-wah (51%[19]);

 

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

Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (49%); CS Henry Tang Ying-yen (45%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng Yu-wah (42%); CE Donald Tsang Yam-kuen (41%); Secretary for Education Michael Suen Ming-yeung (34%[19]); Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau Tang-wah (34%[19]); Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung (33%); Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (29%)

 

"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 (32%, 46%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau Ng Wai-lan (29%, 42%)

 

"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

[19] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung is 51.3%, while that of FS John Tsang Chun-wah is 50.7%; the approval rate of Secretary for Education Michael Suen is 34.5%, while that of Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau is 34.4%.


Future Release (Tentative)

  • November 16, 2010 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Hong Kong people's feeling towards different governments and peoples

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