HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

 

Press Release on November 13, 2018

| Detailed Findings (Rating of Chief Executive Carrie Lam) | Detailed Findings (Popularity of Principal Officials) |

Special Announcements

1. From July 2017, apart from sampling landline numbers to conduct opinion surveys, the Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong has also added mobile numbers to the sampling frame. After three months of testing, in October 2017, POP formalized the use of mixed samples as its standard for regular opinion surveys using a landline and mobile sample ratio of 4 to 1. Starting from April 2018, POP further increased the proportion of mobile sample, which the landline and mobile sample ratio became 2 to 1. The figures released today by POP have already incorporated landline and mobile samples.

2. In September 2017, POP started to use “effective response rate” to report surveys’ contact information. In July 2018, POP further revised the calculation of effective response rate. Thus, the response rates before and after the change cannot be directly compared.

3. To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, POP today released via the “HKU POP SITE” (http://hkupop.hku.hk) the raw data and related respondents’ demographics of the latest rating survey of CE Carrie Lam, together with those of regular rating surveys of former CEs CH Tung, Donald Tsang and CY Leung released earlier, for public examination. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.

Abstract

POP interviewed 1,002 Hong Kong people between 1 and 6 November, 2018 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that the popularity figures of CE Carrie Lam have not changed much since two weeks ago. Her popularity rating rises slightly to 52.3 marks, approval rate at 40%, disapproval rate 45%, giving a net popularity of negative 5 percentage points. As for the Secretaries of Departments, the support rating of CS Matthew Cheung drops slightly to 47.8 marks. His latest approval rate and disapproval rate both stand at 28%, giving a net popularity of positive 1 percentage point. The support rating of FS Paul Chan drops significantly by 4.2 marks to 37.1 marks, approval rate 21%, disapproval rate 50%, thus a net popularity of negative 29 percentage points, significantly down by 10 percentage points compared to a month ago. As for SJ Teresa Cheng, her support rating drops to 36.7 marks, approval rate 16%, disapproval rate 38%, giving a net popularity of negative 23 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating and net approval rate, Matthew Cheung continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department, despite the fact that both his support rating and his net popularity are at record low since he took office. As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 2 among 13 Directors have gone up, 10 have gone down while 1 remained unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing and Secretary for Security John Lee register significant changes in their net approval rates, down by 17, 15 and 9 percentage points respectively. Their latest net approval rates, together with those of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau, Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau, Secretary for Development Michael Wong and Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan, are at record low since they took office. Among all the Directors, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan and Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah register negative popularities, at negative 1, negative 7, negative 13, negative 15 and negative 16 percentage points respectively. Sophia Chan continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 36 percentage points. According to POP’s standard, no one falls under the category of “ideal” or “successful” performer. The performance of Sophia Chan, Law Chi-kwong, Carrie Lam, Edward Yau, John Lee, Wong Kam-sing, Matthew Cheung, Kevin Yeung, Frank Chan, Lau Kong-wah, Nicholas Yang, Paul Chan and Teresa Cheng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Joshua Law, Michael Wong, Patrick Nip and James Lau can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. No one falls into the category of “depressing” or “disastrous” performer. The maximum sampling error of all approval and disapproval rates is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling errors of rating figures and net approval rates need another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 59%.

Points to note:

[1] The address of the “HKU POP SITE” is http://hkupop.hku.hk, journalists can check out the details of the survey there.

[2] The sample size of this survey is 1,002 successful interviews, not 1,002 x 58.9% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.

[3] “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 rating not more than +/-2.3, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, and sampling error of net values not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level”.

[4] Because of sampling errors in conducting the survey(s) and the rounding procedures in processing the data, the figures cannot be too precise, and the totals may not be completely accurate. Therefore, when quoting percentages of the survey(s), journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, but when quoting the rating figures, one decimal place can be used.

[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

From July 2017, POP enhanced the previous weighting method that has been used for quite a few years. Apart from age, gender and education, economic activity group is now also taken into account when adjusting data. The latest figures released today have been rim-weighted according to figures provided by the Census and Statistics Department. The gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population came from “Mid-year population for 2017”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong - Key Statistics (2018 Edition)”. In the past, the mobile sample would be rim-weighted according to the basic Public Sentiment Index (PSI) figures collected in the landline sample. In July 2018, POP further refined the weighting method. The landline sample and the mobile sample would no longer be processed separately. The mobile sample would also no longer be adjusted using the basic PSI figures collected in the landline sample. The overall effect is that the importance of the mobile sample would be increased. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:

Date of survey

Sample size

Effective response rate

Maximum sampling error of percentages[6]

1-6/11/2018

1,002

58.9%

+/-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 and net approval rates are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.


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


Recent popularity figures of CE Carrie Lam are summarized as follows:

Date of survey

3-6/9/18

18-20/9/18

2-4/10/18

10/10/18 [8]

22-24/10/18

1-6/11/18

Latest change

Sample base

1,030

1,002

1,002

584

1,006

1,002

--

Effective response rate

50.4%

55.6%

46.8%

65.9%

63.4%

58.9%

--

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error [9]

--

Rating of CE Carrie Lam

57.3

50.8[10]

52.3

47.6[10]

51.7[10]

52.3+/-1.8

+0.6

Vote of confidence in CE Carrie Lam

48%

40%[10]

44%

37%[10]

41%

40+/-3%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in CE Carrie Lam

38%

45%[10]

40%[10]

48%[10]

42%[10]

45+/-3%

+3%

Net approval rate

10%

-4%[10]

4%[10]

-10%[10]

-1%

-5+/-6%

-4%

[8] This survey was the Policy Address instant poll.

[9] 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 +/-1.8, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-6% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.

[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 is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.


Recent popularity figures of the three Secretaries of Departments under the accountability system are summarized below:

Date of survey

4-7/6/18

3-5/7/18

6-9/8/18

3-6/9/18

2-4/10/18

1-6/11/18

Latest change

Sample base[11]

747-804

531-554

719-747

551-565

535-539

541-558

--

Effective response rate*

56.3%

49.5%

51.2%

50.4%

46.8%

58.9%

--

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error [12]

--

Rating of CS Matthew Cheung

51.6

51.6

50.9

51.5

48.0[13]

47.8+/-2.3

-0.2

Vote of confidence in
CS Matthew Cheung

31%

32%

31%

33%

28%

28+/-4%

--

Vote of no confidence in
CS Matthew Cheung

23%

22%

21%

24%

23%

28+/-4%

+5%

Net approval rate

8%

9%

10%

9%

6%

1+/-7%

-5%

Rating of FS Paul Chan

39.5

40.1

39.5

38.9

41.3

37.1+/-2.3

-4.2[13]

Vote of confidence in FS Paul Chan

17%

20%

18%

20%

23%

21+/-4%

-2%

Vote of no confidence in FS Paul Chan

50%

48%

49%

48%

43%

50+/-4%

+7%[13]

Net approval rate

-33%

-28%

-31%

-29%

-19%

-29+/-7%

-10%[13]

Rating of SJ Teresa Cheng

40.0

40.9

40.3

41.2

39.2

36.7+/-2.3

-2.6

Vote of confidence in SJ Teresa Cheng

18%

19%

17%

21%

18%

16+/-3%

-2%

Vote of no confidence in SJ Teresa Cheng

37%

37%

36%

32%

34%

38+/-4%

+4%

Net approval rate

-19%

-18%

-19%

-11%

-17%

-23+/-6%

-6%

* In July 2018, POP revised the calculation of effective response rate. Thus, the response rates before and after the change cannot be directly compared.

[11] The frequency of this series of questions is different from that of CE popularity ratings. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals. These questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned, the sample size for each question also varies.

[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 +/-2.3, sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-7% 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 is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.


Latest popularity figures of Directors of Bureaux under the accountability system are summarized below, in descending order of net approval rates:

Date of survey

3-6/9/18

2-4/10/18

1-6/11/18

Latest change

Sample base[14]

590-653

578-630

575-621

--

Effective response rate

50.4%

46.8%

58.9%

--

Sample base / Percentage of answer

Base

%

Base

%

Base

% &
error [15]

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan

619

51%

594

44%[16]

590

46+/-4%

+3%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan

619

8%

594

14%[16]

590

10+/-3%

-3%

Net approval rate

619

43%

594

30%[16]

590

36+/-5%

+6%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau

644

40%

601

37%

579

39+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau

644

13%

601

11%

579

13+/-3%

+2%

Net approval rate

644

27%[16]

601

27%

579

26+/-6%

-1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law

610

38%[16]

630

36%

583

37+/-4%

--

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law

610

10%

630

10%

583

11+/-3%

+1%

Net approval rate

610

28%[16]

630

26%

583

25+/-5%[17]

-1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong

613

45%

612

41%

614

42+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong

613

11%

612

16%[16]

614

17+/-3%

+1%

Net approval rate

613

34%

612

25%[16]

614

25+/-6%[17]

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau

590

22%

600

22%

606

21+/-3%

-2%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau

590

10%[16]

600

8%

606

10+/-2%

+2%

Net approval rate

590

12%

600

15%

606

10+/-4%

-4%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security John Lee

595

36%

589

34%

618

31+/-4%

-4%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security John Lee

595

16%

589

19%

618

25+/-4%

+6%[16]

Net approval rate

595

20%

589

15%

618

6+/-6%

-9%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Michael Wong

622

24%

601

19%

605

24+/-4%

+4%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Michael Wong

622

15%

601

12%

605

19+/-3%

+7%[16]

Net approval rate

622

9%

601

7%

605

4+/-5%

-3%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip

653

22%

601

21%

599

21+/-3%

--

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip

653

16%

601

16%

599

20+/-3%

+4%

Net approval rate

653

6%

601

5%

599

1+/-5%

-3%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing

631

38%

578

33%

621

29+/-4%

-4%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing

631

18%[16]

578

20%

621

30+/-4%

+10%[16]

Net approval rate

631

20%

578

14%

621

-1+/-6%

-15%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang

623

24%

607

22%

581

23+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang

623

25%

607

24%

581

30+/-4%

+6%[16]

Net approval rate

623

-1%

607

-2%

581

-7+/-6%

-5%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung

638

26%

591

31%

618

25+/-3%

-6%[16]

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung

638

29%

591

26%

618

37+/-4%

+11%[16]

Net approval rate

638

-3%

591

5%

618

-13+/-6%

-17%[16]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan

611

23%

584

26%

619

25+/-3%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan

611

35%

584

38%

619

40+/-4%

+2%

Net approval rate

611

-12%

584

-12%

619

-15+/-6%

-4%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah

598

26%

589

24%

575

24+/-4%

--

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah

598

44%[16]

589

40%

575

39+/-4%

-1%

Net approval rate

598

-18%[16]

589

-16%

575

-16+/-7%

+1%

[14] 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% and sampling error of net approval rates not more than +/-7% 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 is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.

[17] Based on the figures of latest survey, in one decimal place, the respective net approval rates of Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong are 25.5 and 25.4 percentage points. Thus, they are ranked third and fourth this time.


The latest survey showed that CE Carrie Lam scored 52.3 marks, and 40% supported her as CE, her net approval rate is negative 5 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Matthew Cheung, FS Paul Chan and SJ Teresa Cheng were 47.8, 37.1 and 36.7 marks, and 28%, 21% and 16% would vote for their reappointments correspondingly. Their net approval rates are positive 1, negative 29 and negative 23 percentage points respectively.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, according to the net approval rates, results revealed that the top position goes to Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan, attaining positive 36 percentage points. The 2nd to 4th places belong to Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau, Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law and Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong with net approval rates of positive 26, positive 25 and positive 25 percentage points respectively. Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau, Secretary for Security John Lee, Secretary for Development Michael Wong, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan and Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah ranked 5th to 13th, their corresponding net approval rates are positive 10, positive 6, positive 4, positive 1, negative 1, negative 7, negative 13, negative 15 and negative 16 percentage points. In other words, no Director scored a net approval rate of over 50%.

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 2 to 4 October, 2018 while this survey was conducted from 1 to 6 November, 2018. 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.

1/11/18

The Public Transport Fare Subsidy Scheme will be implemented next year.

31/10/18

The Environment Bureau will introduce the Charging for Municipal Solid Waste Bill into the Legislative Council soon.

25/10/18

Cathay Pacific leaks personal data of 9.4 million people.

24/10/18

The Hong Kong-Zhuhai-Macao Bridge officially commences operation.

16/10/18

The traffic is paralyzed as four MTR lines encounter signalling issues.

14/10/18

People protest against Lantau Tomorrow Vision.

12/10/18

The returning officer declares Lau Siu-lai’s nomination for Legislative Council Kowloon West by-election invalid.

11/10/18

Hong Kong stock market drops sharply after US falls.

10/10/18

Chief Executive Carrie Lam delivers the 2018 Policy Address.


Commentary

Note: The following commentary was written by Senior Data Analyst of POP, Edward Tai.

Our latest survey shows that the popularity figures of CE Carrie Lam have not changed much since two weeks ago. Her popularity rating rises slightly to 52.3 marks, approval rate at 40%, disapproval rate 45%, giving a net popularity of negative 5 percentage points.

As for the Secretaries of Departments, the support rating of CS Matthew Cheung drops slightly to 47.8 marks. His latest approval rate and disapproval rate both stand at 28%, giving a net popularity of positive 1 percentage point. The support rating of FS Paul Chan drops significantly by 4.2 marks to 37.1 marks, approval rate 21%, disapproval rate 50%, thus a net popularity of negative 29 percentage points, significantly down by 10 percentage points compared to a month ago. As for SJ Teresa Cheng, her support rating drops to 36.7 marks, approval rate 16%, disapproval rate 38%, giving a net popularity of negative 23 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating and net approval rate, Matthew Cheung continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department, despite the fact that both his support rating and his net popularity are at record low since he took office.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 2 among 13 Directors have gone up, 10 have gone down while 1 remained unchanged. Among them, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing and Secretary for Security John Lee register significant changes in their net approval rates, down by 17, 15 and 9 percentage points respectively. Their latest net approval rates, together with those of Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau, Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau, Secretary for Development Michael Wong and Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan, are at record low since they took office. Among all the Directors, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang, Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung, Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan and Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah register negative popularities, at negative 1, negative 7, negative 13, negative 15 and negative 16 percentage points respectively. Sophia Chan continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 36 percentage points.

According to POP’s standard, no one falls under the category of “ideal” or “successful” performer. The performance of Sophia Chan, Law Chi-kwong, Carrie Lam, Edward Yau, John Lee, Wong Kam-sing, Matthew Cheung, Kevin Yeung, Frank Chan, Lau Kong-wah, Nicholas Yang, Paul Chan and Teresa Cheng can be labeled as “mediocre”. That of Joshua Law, Michael Wong, Patrick Nip and James Lau can be labeled as “inconspicuous”. No one falls into the category of “depressing” or “disastrous” performer.

The following table summarizes the grading of CE Carrie Lam and the principal officials for readers’ easy reference:

“Ideal”: those with approval rates of over 66%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets

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

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

Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan Siu-chee (46%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong (42%); CE Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (40%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau Tang-wah (39%); Secretary for Security John Lee Ka-chiu (31%); Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing (29%); CS Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (28%); Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung (25%)[18]; Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan Fan (25%)[18]; Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah (24%); Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang Wei-hsiung (23%); FS Paul Chan Mo-po (21%); SJ Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah (16%)

“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 Joshua Law Chi-kong (37%, 48%); Secretary for Development Michael Wong Wai-lun (24%, 43%); Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip Tak-kuen (21%, 41%); Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Henry Lau Jr (21%, 31%)

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

“Disastrous”: those with disapproval rates of over 66%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets

[18] In one decimal place, the respective approval rates of Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung and Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan are 24.7% and 24.6%.


Future Release (Tentative)

  • November 20, 2018 (Tuesday) 12pm to 2pm: Ratings of Top 10 Legislative Councillors