HKU POP releases popularity figures of CE and principal officialsBack

 

Press Release on March 12, 2019

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

Contact Information

Date of survey

:

28/2-5/3/2019

Survey method

:

Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers (including landline and mobile numbers)

Target population

:

Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above

Sample size[1]

:

1,024

Effective response rate[2]

:

72.2%

Sampling error[3]

:

Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, that of net values not more than +/-7% and that of ratings not more than +/-2.4 at 95% confidence level

Weighting method[4]

:

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)”.

[1] Starting from April 2018, POP revised the landline and mobile sample ratio to 2 to 1. The figures released today by POP have already incorporated landline and mobile samples.

[2] Before September 2017, “overall response rate” was used to report surveys’ contact information. Starting from September 2017, “effective response rate” was used. 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] All error figures in this release are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times with different random samples, we would expect 95 times having the population parameter within the respective error margins calculated. Because of sampling errors, when quoting percentages, journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, whereas one decimal place can be used when quoting rating figures.

[4] 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.


Latest Figures

To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, the Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong 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.

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

Date of survey

17-20/12/18

7-11/1/19

21-24/1/19

29/1-8/2/19

18-21/2/19

28/2-5/3/19

Latest change

Sample size

1,000

1,007

1,000

1,000

1,001

1,024

--

Response rate

60.6%

55.6%

59.0%

63.0%

72.1%

72.2%

--

Latest findings

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error

--

Rating of CE Carrie Lam

56.4[5]

50.9[5]

45.5[5]

47.4

50.0[5]

50.9+/-1.7

+0.9

Vote of confidence in CE Carrie Lam

49%[5]

37%[5]

32%[5]

35%

38%

35+/-3%

-3%

Vote of no confidence in CE Carrie Lam

39%[5]

48%[5]

52%

49%

45%

51+/-3%

+6%[5]

Net approval rate

10%[5]

-11%[5]

-20%[5]

-14%

-7%

-16+/-6%

-9%[5]

[5] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at 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

1-6/11/18

3-6/12/18

7-11/1/19

29/1-8/2/19

27/2/19

28/2-5/3/19

Latest change

Sample size[6]

541-558

506-518

538-576

511-542

621

591-680

--

Response rate

58.9%

54.6%

55.6%

63.0%

78.2%

72.2%

--

Latest findings

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error

--

Rating of CS Matthew Cheung

47.8

44.8

47.4

46.4

--

47.7+/-1.9

+1.3

Vote of confidence in
CS Matthew Cheung

28%

28%

26%

27%

--

26+/-3%

-1%

Vote of no confidence in
CS Matthew Cheung

28%

27%

24%

24%

--

28+/-3%

+3%

Net approval rate

1%

1%

2%

2%

--

-1+/-6%

-4%

Rating of FS Paul Chan

37.1[7]

37.6

40.2

37.6

40.5

39.7+/-2.1

-0.8

Vote of confidence in FS Paul Chan

21%

18%

22%

22%

19%

21+/-3%

+2%

Vote of no confidence in FS Paul Chan

50%[7]

49%

47%

48%

49%

52+/-4%

+2%

Net approval rate

-29%[7]

-31%

-25%

-26%

-31%

-30+/-6%

--

Rating of SJ Teresa Cheng

36.7

37.1

30.4[7]

31.3

--

34.4+/-2.4

+3.1

Vote of confidence in SJ Teresa Cheng

16%

13%

11%

13%

--

14+/-3%

--

Vote of no confidence in SJ Teresa Cheng

38%

39%

59%[7]

51%[7]

--

53+/-4%

+2%

Net approval rate

-23%

-27%

-48%[7]

-38%[7]

--

-40+/-6%

-2%

[6] 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 use sub-samples of the surveys concerned; the sample size for each question also varies. The survey conducted on 27/2/2019 was the Budget instant survey and only asked rating of FS as well as his vote of confidence.

[7] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at 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 [8]:

Date of survey

3-6/12/18

7-11/1/19

29/1-8/2/19

28/2-5/3/19

Latest change

Sample size[9]

583-623

561-630

566-622

582-640

--

Response rate

54.6%

55.6%

63.0%

72.2%

--

Latest findings

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error

--

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan

47%

45%

43%

48+/-4%

+5%

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

12%

10%

12%

13+/-3%

+1%

Net approval rate

34%

34%

31%

35+/-6%

+4%

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

39%

33%[10]

39%[10]

43+/-4%

+3%

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

14%

13%

12%

10+/-2%

-2%

Net approval rate

25%

20%

27%[10]

33+/-5%

+5%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law

34%

37%

31%[10]

37+/-4%

+6%[10]

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

12%

8%[10]

15%[10]

14+/-3%

-1%

Net approval rate

22%

29%

16%[10]

23+/-5%

+7%

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

29%

27%

33%[10]

37+/-4%

+4%

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

23%[10]

25%

17%[10]

21+/-3%

+4%

Net approval rate

6%

2%

16%[10]

17+/-6%

--

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

19%

17%

21%[10]

24+/-3%

+3%

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

10%

11%

10%

8+/-2%

-1%

Net approval rate

9%

6%

12%

16+/-4%

+4%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Security John Lee

31%

27%

32%

36+/-4%

+5%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Security John Lee

19%[10]

22%

17%

21+/-3%

+3%

Net approval rate

12%

5%

14%[10]

16+/-6%

+1%

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

39%

37%

27%[10]

37+/-4%

+9%[10]

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

17%

14%

26%[10]

21+/-3%

-5%

Net approval rate

22%

22%

1%[10]

15+/-6%

+14%[10]

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Development Michael Wong

21%

19%

20%

25+/-3%

+4%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Development Michael Wong

19%

13%[10]

15%

14+/-3%

-1%

Net approval rate

2%

6%

5%

10+/-5%

+5%

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

18%

16%

20%

21+/-3%

+1%

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

18%

14%

18%

18+/-3%

--

Net approval rate

1%

2%

2%

3+/-5%

+1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang

22%

17%[10]

22%[10]

24+/-3%

+2%

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

29%

25%

23%

29+/-4%

+6%[10]

Net approval rate

-7%

-7%

-1%

-5+/-6%

-4%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung

23%

19%

24%[10]

25+/-4%

+1%

Vote of no confidence in Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung

39%

33%[10]

32%

32+/-4%

--

Net approval rate

-16%

-14%

-7%

-6+/-6%

+1%

Vote of confidence in Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan

21%

21%

22%

27+/-4%

+5%[10]

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

40%

41%

36%

38+/-4%

+1%

Net approval rate

-19%

-19%

-14%

-10+/-7%

+4%

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

21%

19%

24%

26+/-4%

+2%

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

42%

42%

33%[10]

40+/-4%

+7%[10]

Net approval rate

-21%

-23%

-9%[10]

-14+/-6%

-5%

[8] If the rounded figures are the same, numbers after the decimal point will be considered.

[9] 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 use sub-samples of the surveys concerned; the sample size for each question also varies.

[10] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at 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.


The latest survey showed that CE Carrie Lam scored 50.9 marks, and 35% supported her as CE, her net approval rate is negative 16 percentage points. Meanwhile, the corresponding ratings of CS Matthew Cheung, FS Paul Chan and SJ Teresa Cheng were 47.7, 39.7 and 34.4 marks, while 26%, 21% and 14% would vote for their reappointments correspondingly. Their net approval rates are negative 1, negative 30 and negative 40 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 35 percentage points. The 2nd place belongs to Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau with a net approval rate of positive 33 percentage points. Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law, Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Lau, Secretary for Security John Lee, Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong, Secretary for Development Michael Wong, Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip, 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 3rd to 13th, their corresponding net approval rates are positive 23, positive 17, positive 16, positive 16, positive 15, positive 10, positive 3, negative 5, negative 6, negative 10 and negative 14 percentage points. In other words, no Director scored a net approval rate of over 50%.

Opinion Daily

In 2007, POP started collaborating with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP a record of significant events of that day according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would then be uploaded to “Opinion Daily” after they are verified by POP.

For some of the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey was conducted from 29 January to 8 February, 2019 while this survey was conducted from 28 February to 5 March, 2019. 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.

1/3/19

The central government introduces eight policy measures for Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area.

27/2/19

Financial Secretary Paul Chan delivers the Budget.

26/2/19

The central government sends a letter to the Chief Executive on the SAR government’s ban on the Hong Kong National Party.

20/2/19

The government fully endorses the land supply options proposed by the Task Force on Land Supply.

18/2/19

The outline development plan for the Guangdong-Hong Kong-Macao Greater Bay Area is announced by the central government.

16/2/19

A cable on the Shenzhen Bay Bridge is found to have snapped.

13/2/19

The government proposes to amend legislation to impose a complete ban on e-cigarettes.

12/2/19

The government proposes to amend legislation so that extradition requests can be handled on a one-off, case-by-case basis.

30/1/19

More problems about the construction of the Hung Hom Station at the Shatin to Central Link are discovered and inspection documents are found missing.

29/1/19

The government announces $500 million has been reserved for the Hospital Authority to cope with the flu season.


Commentary

Note: The following commentary was written by Research Manager of POP, Frank Lee.

Our latest survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 50.9 marks. Her approval rate is 35%, disapproval rate 51%, giving a net popularity of negative 16 percentage points, registering a decrease of 9 percentage points compared to around two weeks ago.

As for the Secretaries of Departments, the latest support rating of CS Matthew Cheung is 47.7 marks, approval rate 26%, disapproval rate 28%, giving a net popularity of negative 1 percentage point. This is his first time to register a negative net approval rate since he took office. The latest support rating of FS Paul Chan is 39.7 marks, approval rate 21%, disapproval rate 52%, thus a net popularity of negative 30 percentage points, which is very similar to the results of our Budget instant poll. As for SJ Teresa Cheng, her support rating is 34.4 marks, approval rate 14%, disapproval rate 53%, giving a net popularity of negative 40 percentage points. In terms of popularity rating and net approval rate, Matthew Cheung continues to be the most popular Secretary of Department.

As for the Directors of Bureaux, compared to one month ago, the net approval rates of 10 among 13 Directors have gone up, 2 have gone down while 1 remained unchanged. Among them, only the net approval rate of Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong has changed significantly, which rebounded by 14 percentage points after the huge drop last month. Among all the Directors, 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 5, negative 6, negative 10 and negative 14 percentage points respectively. Sophia Chan continues to be the most popular Director, with a net approval rate of positive 35 percentage points.

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

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[11]

“Successful”: those with approval rates of over 50%; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets[11]

“Mediocre”: those not belonging to other 5 types; ranked by their approval rates shown inside brackets[11]

Secretary for Food and Health Sophia Chan Siu-chee (48%); Secretary for Commerce and Economic Development Edward Yau Tang-wah (43%); Secretary for the Environment Wong Kam-sing (37%); Secretary for the Civil Service Joshua Law Chi-kong (37%); Secretary for Labour and Welfare Law Chi-kwong (37%); Secretary for Security John Lee Ka-chiu (36%); Secretary for Transport and Housing Frank Chan Fan (27%); CS Matthew Cheung Kin-chung (26%); Secretary for Home Affairs Lau Kong-wah (26%); Secretary for Education Kevin Yeung Yun-hung (25%); Secretary for Innovation and Technology Nicholas Yang Wei-hsiung (24%)

“Inconspicuous”: those with recognition rates of less than 50%; ranked by their approval rates [11]; the first figure inside bracket is approval rate while the second figure is recognition rate

Secretary for Development Michael Wong Wai-lun (25%, 39%); Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury James Henry Lau Jr (24%, 33%); Secretary for Constitutional and Mainland Affairs Patrick Nip Tak-kuen (21%, 38%)

“Depressing”: those with disapproval rates of over 50%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets[11]

SJ Teresa Cheng Yeuk-wah (53%); FS Paul Chan Mo-po (52%); CE Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor (51%)

“Disastrous”: those with disapproval rates of over 66%; ranked by their disapproval rates shown inside brackets[11]

[11] If the rounded figures are the same, numbers after the decimal point will be considered.


Future Release (Tentative)

  • March 19, 2019 (Tuesday) 12pm to 2pm: Trust and Confidence Indicators