HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

Press Release on February 15, 2011

Special Announcement

As in previous years, the Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong will conduct an instant survey next Wednesday after the Financial Secretary John Tsang gives his Budget Talk. Results are due to be published the following day. Media which would like to sponsor the survey in order to obtain results that same evening please contact us as early as possible.

Abstract

POP interviewed 1,027 Hong Kong people between February 7 and 11 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. The survey shows that the popularity of CE Donald Tsang has dropped significantly compared to two weeks ago. CE's net popularity now stands at negative 16 percentage points, which is the poorest since August 2010. Further analysis shows that CE Donald Tsang continues to receive poorest evaluation from the grassroots. However, his popularity drop this time is mainly due to reduced support from the relatively upper stratum. For the Secretaries of Departments, compared to one month ago, the support rating of CS Henry Tang dropped significantly by 6.5 marks to 48.7, reaching a record low since he became CS, probably due to his criticism of the post 80s. Meanwhile, the approval rate of FS John Tsang has significantly gone up by 8 percentage points, while the popularity figures of SJ Wong Yan-lung have not changed much. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 7, John Tsang positive 34 and Wong Yan-lung positive 53 percentage points. 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 up, 3 have gone down and 2 remained unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam has registered change in approval rate beyond sampling error, with a drop of 5-percentage-points, while only Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue has registered a drop in disapproval rate of 9-percentage-points, which is beyond sampling error. Among the Directors of Bureaux, those with negative popularity 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 11, negative 8 and negative 7 percentage points respectively. According to POP's standard, no official falls under the category of"ideal" performance. Ambrose Lee, Wong Yan-lung, Carrie Lam, Matthew Cheung and John Tsang now fall under the category of"successful". York Chow, Eva Cheng, Edward Yau, Henry Tang, Michael Suen, Tsang Tak-sing and Stephen Lam can be labeled as"mediocre". Ceajer Chan, Rita Lau and Denise Yue can be labeled as"inconspicuous". Donald Tsang can be labeled as"depressing" while no official falls under the category of"disastrous". The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-3 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figures needs another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 67%.

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 1,027 successful interviews, not 1,027 x 67.1% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-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 +/-1.8 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]
7-11/2/2011	1,027	67.1%	+/-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)
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	6-10/12/10	17-22/12/10	5-12/1/11	18-26/1/11	7-11/2/11	Latest change
Sample base	1,011	1,017	1,025	1,018	1,027	--
Overall response rate	65.0%	66.4%	64.9%	65.8%	67.1%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[8]	--
Rating of CE Donald Tsang	54.4	53.3	54.6^[9]	53.5	51.9+/-1.3	-1.6^[9]
Vote of confidence in CE Donald Tsang	37%	39%	39%	38%	34+/-3%	-4%^[9]
Vote of no confidence in CE Donald Tsang	47%^[9]	44%	45%	46%	50+/-3%	+4%^[9]
Net approval rate	-10%	-5%	-6%	-8%	-16%	-8%

[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] 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	5-8/10/10	2-6/11/10	6-10/12/10	5-12/1/11	7-11/2/11	Latest change^[10]
Sample base^[10]	1,014	1,008	1,011	536-549	566-574	--
Overall response rate	60.0%	64.1%	65.0%	64.9%	67.1%	--
Latest finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[11]	--
Ratings of CS Henry Tang	56.2^[12]	54.5^[12]	55.4	55.2	48.7+/-1.8	-6.5^[12]
Vote of confidence in CS Henry Tang	49%^[12]	45%^[12]	46%	43%	34+/-4%	-9%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in CS Henry Tang	17%^[12]	19%	18%	18%	27+/-4%	+9%^[12]
Net approval rate	32%	26%	28%	25%	7%	-18%
Ratings of FS John Tsang	56.3^[12]	55.2	55.5	55.2	55.4+/-1.7	+0.2
Vote of confidence in FS John Tsang	50%	51%	49%	43%^[12]	51+/-4%	+8%^[12]
Vote of no confidence in FS John Tsang	17%	19%	16%^[12]	22%^[12]	17+/-3%	-5%^[12]
Net approval rate	33%	32%	33%	21%	34%	+13%
Ratings of SJ Y.L. Wong	60.0	60.0	60.9	60.9	59.6+/-1.4	-1.3
Vote of confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong	61%	61%	62%	59%	60+/-4%	+1%
Vote of no confidence in SJ Y.L.Wong	9%	8%	8%	6%	7+/-2%	+1%
Net approval rate	52%	53%	54%	53%	53%	--

[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. 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 +/-1.8, 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.
[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	6-10/12/10		5-12/1/11		7-11/2/11		Latest change
Total sample size^[13]	1,011		1,025		1,027		--
Overall response rate	65.0%		64.9%		67.1%		--
Sample base for each question/ Percentage of answer	Base	%	Base	%	Base	%& error^[14]	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee	563	64%^[15]	543	66%	599	63+/-4%	-3%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee	563	11%^[15]	543	8%^[15]	599	9+/-2%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	53%	--	58%	--	54%	-4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam^[16]	526	56%^[15]	528	49%^[15]	529	51+/-4%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Carrie Lam	526	12%^[15]	528	16%^[15]	529	15+/-3%	-1%
Net approval rate	--	44%	--	33%	--	36%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung^[16]	531	49%	565	47%	563	51+/-4%	+4%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung	531	14%^[15]	565	14%	563	15+/-3%	+1%
Net approval rate	--	35%	--	33%	--	36%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow	520	52%	565	48%	553	47+/-4%	-1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health York Chow	520	23%	565	24%	553	22+/-4%	-2%
Net approval rate	--	29%	--	24%	--	25%	+1%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng	550	41%	540	36%^[15]	559	39+/-4%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng	550	22%	540	25%	559	22+/-4%	-3%
Net approval rate	--	19%	--	11%	--	17%	+6%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau^[17]	510	38%	549	35%	548	36+/-4%	+1%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau	510	21%^[15]	549	25%	548	23+/-4%	-2%
Net approval rate	--	17%	--	10%	--	13%	+3%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan^[17]	577	33%	572	36%	564	36+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan	577	12%	572	12%	564	12+/-3%	--
Net approval rate	--	21%	--	24%	--	24%	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau^[18]	525	29%	575	26%	576	30+/-4%	+4%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau	525	11%	575	14%	576	13+/-3%	-1%
Net approval rate	--	18%	--	12%	--	17%	+5%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen^[18]	578	26%^[15]	568	30%	620	30+/-4%	--
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Michael Suen	578	43%^[15]	568	42%	620	38+/-4%	-4%
Net approval rate	--	-17%	--	-12%	--	-8%	+4%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing^[19]	565	28%	554	26%	619	28+/-4%	+2%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing	565	37%	554	37%	619	39+/-4%	+2%
Net approval rate	--	-9%	--	-11%	--	-11%	--
Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue^[19]	522	30%^[15]	555	24%^[15]	600	28+/-4%	+4%
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue	522	23%^[15]	555	25%	600	16+/-3%	-9%^[15]
Net approval rate	--	7%	--	-1%	--	12%	+13%
Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam	514	29%	578	32%	544	27+/-4%	-5%^[15]
Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam	514	34%	578	30%	544	34+/-4%	+4%
Net approval rate	--	-5%	--	2%	--	-7%	-9%

[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 two decimal places, the approval rate of Secretary for Development Carrie Lam is 50.93%, while that of Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung is 50.87%.
[17] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Environment Edward Yau is 36.4%, while that of Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan is 35.6%.
[18] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau is 30.5%, while that of Secretary for Education Michael Suen is 30.0%.
[19] In one decimal place, the approval rate of Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing is 28.0%, while that of Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue is 27.7%.

The latest survey showed that, CE Donald Tsang scored 51.9 marks, and 34% supported him as the Chief Executive, thus his net approval rate is negative 16%. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Henry Tang, FS John Tsang and SJ Wong Yan-lung were 48.7, 55.4 and 59.6 marks, and 34%, 51% and 60% would vote for their reappointment correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 7%, 34% and 53% respectively.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, results revealed that the top approval rate fell to Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee, attaining 63%. His net approval rate is positive 54%. The 2nd to 4th places belonged to Secretary for Development Carrie Lam, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung and Secretary for Food and Health York Chow, with approval rate 51%, 51% and 47% respectively and their net approval rates are positive 36%, 36% and 25% respectively. Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng, Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Ceajer Chan, Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau, Secretary for Education Michael Suen, Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing, Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue and Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam ranked 5th to 12th, as they gained 39%, 36%, 36%, 30%, 30%, 28%, 28% and 27% support from the public respectively. Their corresponding net approval rates are positive 17%, positive 13%, positive 24%, positive 17%, negative 8%, negative 11%, positive 12% and negative 7%. In other words, only Ambrose Lee, Carrie Lam and Matthew Cheung scored approval rates of over 50% among all Directors of Bureaux.

Indepth Analysis

In the survey, we also asked respondents to classify themselves which one of the five social strata they belonged to. The options were: upper, upper-middle, middle-middle, lower-middle and lower stratum or grassroots. According to the choice of respondents, we grouped them into relatively upper, relatively middle and relatively lower strata, or in short form upper, middle and lower strata. Each stratum contains about one-third of the sample. The following table shows the mapping between respondents' choice and their final grouping:

Self-reported social stratum	Social stratum group
Upper stratum	Relatively upper stratum (about one-third)
Upper-middle stratum
Middle-middle stratum
Lower-middle stratum	Relatively middle stratum (about one-third)
Lower stratum or grassroots	Relatively lower stratum (about one-third)
Don't know/hard to say/refuse to answer	Unclassified

Herewith further analysis of CE Donald Tsang's popularity by respondents' social strata:

Date of survey: 7-11/2/11		Upper stratum	Middle stratum	Lower stratum	Overall sample size
Rating of CE Donald Tsang		52.1+/-2.1 (361)	52.8+/-2.3 (309)	50.9+/-2.4 (323)	51.9+/-1.3 (993)
Vote of confidence/ no confidence in CE Donald Tsang	Support	34+/-5% (123)	38+/-6% (118)	31+/-5% (99)	34+/-3% (340)
	Oppose	50+/-5% (183)	47+/-6% (145)	52+/-6% (166)	50+/-3% (495)
	Don't know/ hard to say	16+/-4% (59)	14+/-4% (44)	18+/-4% (57)	16+/-2% (161)
	Total	100% (365)	100% (308)	100% (322)	100% (996)

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 January 5 to 12, 2011 while this survey was conducted from February 7 to 11, 2011. 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.

11/2/11	Government adjusts Work Incentive Transport Subsidy Scheme.
8/2/11	PRC Government implements different policies to curb inflation.
5/2/11	A Hong Kong tour guide and three mainland tourists are detained for a fight over shopping.
31/1/11	China sends planes for Hong Kong travelers as protests continued in Egypt.
29/1/11	HK upgrades the travel alert for Egypt after the sixth day of widespread anti-government protests.
29/1/11	Hundreds of friends of Szeto Wah pay respects at mourning sessions at the church.
24/1/11	Home prices in Hong Kong is the most severely unaffordable among the 325 selected urban markets in the world.
15/1/11	Henry Tang encourages Hong Kong youngsters to be more tolerant of different views in the society.
14/1/11	The grown-up mainland children of Hong Kong people are allowed the right of abode in Hong Kong.

Commentary

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

Our latest survey shows that the popularity of CE Donald Tsang has dropped significantly compared to two weeks ago. CE's net popularity now stands at negative 16 percentage points, which is the poorest since August 2010. Further analysis shows that CE Donald Tsang continues to receive poorest evaluation from the grassroots. However, his popularity drop this time is mainly due to reduced support from the relatively upper stratum.

For the Secretaries of Departments, compared to one month ago, the support rating of CS Henry Tang dropped significantly by 6.5 marks to 48.7, reaching a record low since he became CS, probably due to his criticism of the post 80s. Meanwhile, the approval rate of FS John Tsang has significantly gone up by 8 percentage points, while the popularity figures of SJ Wong Yan-lung have not changed much. The net approval rates of the three Secretaries of Departments are Henry Tang positive 7, John Tsang positive 34 and Wong Yan-lung positive 53 percentage points. 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 up, 3 have gone down and 2 remained unchanged. Among them, only Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam has registered change in approval rate beyond sampling error, with a drop of 5-percentage-points, while only Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue has registered a drop in disapproval rate of 9-percentage-points, which is beyond sampling error. Among the Directors of Bureaux, those with negative popularity 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 11, negative 8 and negative 7 percentage points respectively.

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

None

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

Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee Siu-kwong (63%); SJ Wong Yan-lung (60%); Secretary for Development Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (51%^[20]); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (51%^[20]) ;FS John Tsang Chun-wah (51%^[20])

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

Secretary for Food and Health York Chow Yat-ngok (47%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Eva Cheng Yu-wah (39%); Secretary for the Environment Edward Yau Tang-wah (36%); CS Henry Tang Ying-yen (34%); Secretary for Education Michael Suen Ming-yeung (30%); Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak-sing (28%); Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Stephen Lam Sui-lung (27%)

"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% 48%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Rita Lau Ng Wai-lan (30%, 43%); Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue Chung-yee (28%, 43%)

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

CE Donald Tsang Yam-kuen (50%)

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

None

[20] In two decimal places, the approval rate of Secretary for Development Carrie Lam is 50.93%, while that of Secretary for Labour and Welfare Matthew Cheung is 50.87%, and that of FS John Tsang is 50.53%

Future Release (Tentative)

February 22, 2011 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Freedom, social and legal indicators