HKU POP SITE releases the instant poll results on the BudgetBack

 
Press Release on February 25, 2010

| Abstract | Background | Latest Figures | Commentary | Future Release (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (Instant Poll of the 2010 Financial Budget/Popularity of Chief Executive)
| Detailed Findings (Popularity of Principal Officials
) |


Abstract

The Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong interviewed 1,008 Hong Kong people last night (24 February) by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. The survey finds that based on those who understand the Budget, people's instant reaction to John Tsang's third Budget is rather positive, and awareness level is also good. Compared with Tsang's second budget last year, people's satisfaction rate jumps significantly by 17 percentage points, while satisfaction rating also increases significantly by 6 marks. Net satisfaction level now stands at positive 33 percentage points, while the net effect on people's confidence in the future of Hong Kong stands at positive 19 percentage points. However, compared to Tsang's first budget, it is still way behind. In terms of personal popularity, the support rating of John Tsang has significantly increased after his Budget talk, while his support rate has slightly dropped, very different from his first Budget. As for CE Donald Tsang, however, both his support rating and support rate have significantly increased after the Budget, with roughly the same magnitudes as two years ago. Looking backward, the popularity effect of the Budget has generally been positive, with bigger effects on the Financial Secretaries than the Chief Executives. This year is no exception. Whether and how people's reaction will change after knowing more about the Budget will have to be revealed by our next survey. The maximum sampling error of all percentages 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 66%.

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 1,008 successful interviews, not 1,008 x 65.9% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of all percentages 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 +/-1.7 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.



Background

Since 1992, HKUPOP has been conducting Policy Address instant surveys every year. From 1998 onwards, we expanded our instant surveys to cover the Budget Talks. In free and democratic societies, instant surveys are indispensable sources of free information. Combined with appropriate follow-up surveys, and in parallel to expert analyses, they give a multi-dimensional picture of opinion development. They are an important part of a society's interactive development. Starting 2008, we split up previous years' instant survey into two surveys. In our first survey, we measure people's overall appraisal of the Budget, their rating of the Budget, their change in confidence towards Hong Kong's future, and FS's popularity. In our second survey, we focus on people's reactions towards different government proposals, their satisfaction with the government's fiscal policies, and other relevant issues. The instant survey released today is our third release under our new operation.


Latest Figures

The findings of the Budget instant poll released by the POP SITE today 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-2009. Herewith the contact information of various surveys:

Year of survey

Date of survey

Total sample size

Response rate

Sampling error of %[6]

2010

24/2/2010

1,008

65.9%

+/-3%

2009

25/2/2009

1,015

67.7%

+/-3%

2008

27/2/2008

1,077

75.5%

+/-3%

2007

28/2/2007

1,018

65.2%

+/-3%

2006

22/2/2006

1,026

68.3%

+/-3%

2005

16/3/2005

1,041

65.2%

+/-3%

2004

10/3/2004

1,023

64.7%

+/-3%

2003

5/3/2003

1,047

71.4%

+/-3%

2002

6/3/2002

1,041

59.9%

+/-3%

2001

7-8/3/2001

502

67.1%

+/-4%

2000

8/3/2000

856

56.4%

+/-3%

1999

3/3/1999

1,190

62.1%

+/-3%

1998

18/2/1998

804

54.7%

+/-4%

[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 sample error. Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.

People's satisfaction figures with this year's Budget are summarized below together with the previous findings:

Date of survey

Sub-sample base[8]

Recog. rate[8]

Satisfaction rate[9]

Half-half[9]

Dissatisfaction rate[9]

Satisfaction
rating

24/2/2010

724

69%

47%[10] +/-4%

35%[10] +/-4%

14%[10] +/-3%

60.8[10] +/-1.4

25/2/2009

669

63%

30%[10] +/-4%

43%[10] +/-4%

22%[10] +/-3%

54.8[10] +/-1.5

27/2/2008

811

71%

68%[10] +/-3%

21%[10] +/-3%

6%[10] +/-2%

70.6 +/-1.2

28/2/2007

673

64%

62%[10] +/-4%

25% +/-3%

9%[10] +/-2%

--

22/2/2006

577

54%

50% +/-4%

26% +/-4%

19%[10] +/-3%

--

16/3/2005

544

46%

48%[10] +/-4%

29% +/-4%

11% +/-3%

--

10/3/2004

395

32%

37%[10] +/-5%

33%[10] +/-5%

12%[10] +/-3%

--

5/3/2003

495

44%

20%[10] +/-4%

23% +/-4%

50%[10] +/-4%

--

6/3/2002

539

45%

47%[10] +/-4%

23% +/-4%

17% +/-3%

--

7-8/3/2001

263

49%

57%[10] +/-6%

25%[10] +/-5%

13%[10] +/-4%

--

8/3/2000

643

65%

70%[10] +/-4%

12%[10] +/-3%

4%[10] +/-2%

--

3/3/1999

598

42%

46%[10] +/-4%

27%[10] +/-4%

10%[10] +/-2%

--

18/2/1998

638

65%

55% +/-4%

20% +/-3%

7% +/-2%

--

[7] All errors 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. Questions using only sub-samples would have bigger sample error. Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.
[8] Sub-samples exclude those respondents who said they had not heard of the Budget, or were not clear about the Budget content, while "recognition rates" used to indicate people's knowledge level further exclude those who answered "don't know / hard to say".
[9] Collapsed from a 5-point scale, with sub-sample base excluding those who said they had not heard of the Budget, or were not clear about the Budget content. Since the base is smaller, the sampling error is bigger.
[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.


After excluding those respondents who said they had not heard of the Budget, or were not clear about the Budget content, this year's instant survey showed that 47% were satisfied with the Budget, 14% were dissatisfied and 35% said "half-half". The average rating registered for the Budget was 60.8 marks, with a recognition rate of 69%.

The survey also gauged the change of people's confidence towards Hong Kong's future after FS John Tsang has delivered his Budget Talk. Results are as follows:

Date of survey

27/2/08

25/2/09

24/2/10

Latest Change

Sub-sample base[12]

925

863

870

--

Overall response rate

75.5%

67.7%

65.9%

--

Latest findings

Finding

Finding

Finding and Error[11]

--

Increased

48%

21%[13]

34% +/-3%

+13%[13]

Unchanged

41%

46%[13]

44% +/-3%

-2%

Decreased

4%

28%[13]

15% +/-2%

-13%[13]

[11] All errors 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. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[12] Those who did not answer this question for various reasons are excluded from the sub-sample. Since the base is smaller, the sampling error is bigger.
[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.


Findings showed that excluding those who did not answer this question for various reasons, 34% said their confidence in the future of Hong Kong had increased, 44% opted for "no change", whilst 15% said their confidence had decreased.

Figures on various Financial Secretaries' popularity before and after their Budget Speeches since 2001[14] are summarized as follows:

 

Popularity of Donald Tsang

Popularity of Antony Leung

Popularity of Henry Tang

Year of the Budget

2001-02

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

Date of Budget Speech[16]

7-8/3/2001

6/3/2002

5/3/2003

10/3/2004

16/3/2005

22/2/2006

28/2/2007

FS's rating at Budget instant survey & error[15]

69.7 +/-1.6

63.4 +/-1.0

49.8 +/-1.2

59.9 +/-0.8

63.3 +/-1.0

63.0 +/-1.2

64.1 +/-1.4

FS's support rate at Budget instant survey & error[15]

--

--

--

--

64% +/-3%

61% +/-4%

62% +/-4%

Date of the latest survey before Budget Speech[17]

19-21/2/2001

18-21/2/2002

1-4/3/2003

1-3/3/2004

1-3/3/2005

3-7/2/2006

1-6/2/2007

FS's rating before the Budget & error[15]

71.9 +/-0.9

57.2 +/-1.2

48.1 +/-1.3

57.4 +/-1.0

59.7 +/-1.0

63.0 +/-1.0

60.8 +/-1.2

FS's support rate before the Budget & error[15]

--

--

--

--

--

65% +/-3%

63% +/-3%

Change in FS's rating

-2.2[18]

+6.2[18]

+1.7[18]

+2.5[18]

+3.6[18]

--

+3.3[18]

Change in FS's support rate

--

--

--

--

--

-4%

-1%

 

Popularity of John Tsang

Year of the Budget

2008-09

2009-2010

2010-2011

Date of Budget Speech[16]

27/2/2008

25/2/2009

24/2/2010

FS's rating at Budget instant survey & error[15]

67.9 +/-1.5

54.9 +/-1.6

61.3 +/-1.4

FS's support rate at Budget instant survey & error[15]

58% +/-4%

43% +/-4%

53% +/-4%

Date of the latest survey before Budget Speech

1-5/2/2008

2-4/2/2009

29/1-2/2/2010

FS's rating before the Budget & error[15]

56.0 +/-1.2

56.7 +/-1.1

58.3 +/-1.1

FS's support rate before the Budget & error[15]

35% +/-3%

47% +/-3%

57% +/-3%

Change in FS's rating

+11.9[18]

-1.8[18]

+3.0[18]

Change in FS's support rate

+23%[18]

-4%

-4%

[14] FS rating was introduced in our Budget instant poll in 2001, while approval rate was introduced in 2005. This table therefore starts from 2001.
[15] All errors 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. Questions using only sub-samples would have bigger sample error. Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.
[16] Starting from 2006, these questions only uses sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of questions on FS's support rating and hypothetical voting in 2010 were 689 and 576 respectively while those in 2009 were 591 and 590.
[17] The frequency of FS rating and approval rate was different before November 2005.
[18] 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.


The survey shows that the latest rating of FS John Tsang after his Budget Talk is 61.3 marks, with approval and disapproval rates of 53% and 8% respectively.

Figures of various Chief Executives' popularity before and after the Budget Speeches since 2002[19] are summarized as follows:

CE Tung Chee-hwa's popularity before and after the Budget Speech from 2002 to 2004

Financial Secretary

Antony Leung

Henry Tang

Year of the Budget

2002-03

2003-04

2004-05

Date of Budget Speech[21]

6/3/2002

5/3/2003

10/3/2004

CE's rating at Budget instant survey & error[20]

54.7 +/-1.4

42.8 +/-1.4

45.0 +/-1.2

CE's support rate at Budget instant survey & error[20]

--

--

13% +/-2%

Date of the latest survey before Budget Speech

1-5/3/2002

1-4/3/2003

1-3/3/2004

CE's rating before the Budget & error[20]

53.2 +/-1.4

43.9 +/-1.4

45.6 +/-1.4

CE's support rate before the Budget & error[20]

42% +/-3%

20% +/-3%

19% +/-2%

Change in CE's rating

+1.5[23]

-1.1

-0.6

Change in CE's support rate

--

--

-6%[23]

CE Donald Tsang's popularity before and after the Budget Speech from 2005 to 2010

Financial Secretary

Henry Tang

John Tsang

Year of the Budget

2005-06[22]

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09

2009-2010

2010-2011

Date of Budget Speech[21]

16/3/2005

22/2/2006

28/2/2007

27/2/2008

25/2/2009

24/2/2010

CE's rating at Budget instant survey & error[20]

70.4 +/-1.0

66.3 +/-1.2

65.7 +/-1.6

66.4 +/-1.4

53.6 +/-1.6

54.4 +/-1.5

CE's support rate at Budget instant survey & error [20]

68% +/-3%

70% +/-4%

74% +/-3%

60% +/-4%

42% +/-4%

38% +/-4%

Date of the latest survey before Budget Speech

--

17-21/2/2006

22-26/2/2007

18-20/2/2008

16-18/2/2009

29/1-2/2/2010

CE's rating before the Budget & error[20]

--

65.9 +/-1.4

65.3 +/-1.4

63.3 +/-1.2

54.4 +/-1.2

51.6 +/-1.2

CE's support rate before the Budget & error [20]

--

65% +/-4%

69% +/-3%

56% +/-3%

41% +/-3%

33% +/-3%

Change in CE's rating

--

+0.4

+0.4

+3.1[23]

-0.8

+2.8[23]

Change in CE's support rate

--

+5%[23]

+5%[23]

+4%

+1%

+5%[23]

[19] Instant surveys on the Budget included CE's rating since 2002, hence the above table does not cover the surveys under Donald Tsang's series. Support rate was included in the instant surveys since 2005.
[20] All errors 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. Questions using only sub-samples would have bigger sample error. Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.
[21] Starting from 2006, these questions only use sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of questions on CE's support rating and hypothetical voting in 2010 were 680 and 672 respectively while those in 2009 were 543 and 572 respectively.
[22] Donald Tsang's popularity as Acting CE was measured for the first time in the Budget instant poll of 2005-06, so there is no figure to compare.
[23] 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.


The instant survey also showed that, the latest rating of CE Donald Tsang after the Budget is 54.4 marks, 38% support him as the Chief Executive while 42% objects.


Commentary

Robert Ting-Yiu Chung, Director of Public Opinion Programme, observed, "Based on those who understand the Budget, our survey finds that people's instant reaction to John Tsang's third Budget is rather positive, and awareness level (as inferred from our recognition rate) is also good. Compared with Tsang's second budget last year, people's satisfaction rate jumps significantly by 17 percentage points, while satisfaction rating also increases significantly by 6 marks. Net satisfaction level now stands at positive 33 percentage points, while the net effect on people's confidence in the future of Hong Kong stands at positive 19 percentage points. However, compared to Tsang's first budget, it is still way behind. In terms of personal popularity, the support rating of John Tsang has significantly increased after his Budget talk, while his support rate has slightly dropped, very different from his first Budget. As for CE Donald Tsang, however, both his support rating and support rate have significantly increased after the Budget, with roughly the same magnitudes as two years ago. Looking backward, the popularity effect of the Budget has generally been positive, with bigger effects on the Financial Secretaries than the Chief Executives. This year is no exception. Whether and how people's reaction will change after knowing more about the Budget will have to be revealed by our next survey."


Future Release (Tentative)

  • March 2, 2010 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and SARG, Budget Second Poll

| Abstract | Background | Latest Figures | Commentary | Future Release (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (Instant Poll of the 2010 Financial Budget/Popularity of Chief Executive)
| Detailed Findings (Popularity of Principal Officials
) |