HKU POP releases a Budget instant pollBack

 
Press Release on February 2, 2012

| Special Announcement | Abstract | Background | Latest Figures | Indepth Analysis | Future Releases (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (Instant Poll of the 2012 Financial Budget/Popularity of Principal Officials) |


Special Announcement

The "PopCon" e-platform (http://popcon.hk) hosted by the Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong is now running the "CE Nomination Guessing Game", to measure users' intelligent guesses. The latest situation is that Henry Tang leads Leung Chun-ying and Albert Ho, with guestimates of 654, 291 and 193 nominations respectively.


Abstract

POP interviewed 1,015 Hong Kong people last night (1 February) by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. After excluding those respondents who said they had heard nothing of the Budget, this year's instant survey shows that 38% are satisfied with the Budget, 26% are dissatisfied and 33% say "half-half". The average rating registered for the Budget is 57.0 marks, with a recognition rate of 79%. All in all, across all 5 Budgets delivered by John Tsang, as well as all 15 Budgets after the handover, people's instant satisfaction of this year's Budget is slightly below average. The survey also shows that the latest rating of FS John Tsang after his Budget Talk is 54.1 marks, with approval and disapproval rates of 29% and 26% respectively. Further analysis shows that older respondents tend to be more dissatisfied with the Budget, and tend to support John Tsang's reappointment as FS. The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-3 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figures and indepth analysis needs another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 71%.

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 1,015 successful interviews, not 1,015 x 71.1% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-3 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 +/-1.4 and sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3% 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. Starting 2011, we revised our design to concentrate on people's appraisal of the Budget and FS's popularity in our instant survey, and move the remaining questions to our follow-up survey. There is no change to our operation this year.

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-year 2011. Herewith the contact information of various surveys:

Year of survey

Date of survey

Total sample size

Response rate

Sampling error of %[6]

2012

1/2/2012

1,015

71.1%

+/-3%

2011

23/2/2011

1,031

72.8%

+/-3%

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[7]

Half-half[7]

Dissatisfaction rate[7]

Satisfaction rating[9]

1/2/2012

826

79%

38[10]+/-3%

33+/-3%

26+/-3%[10]

57.0[10]+/-1.4

23/2/2011

911

86%

27[10]+/-3%

34+/-3%

35[10]+/-3%

51.5[10]+/-1.5

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] Collapsed from a 5-point scale, 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.
[8] Sub-samples exclude those respondents who said they had heard nothing of the Budget, while "recognition rates" used to indicate people's knowledge level further exclude those who answered "don't know / hard to say".
[9] Sub-sample base has excluded those who said they had heard nothing of the Budget. Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected. 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 heard nothing of the Budget, this year's instant survey shows that 38% are satisfied with the Budget, 26% are dissatisfied and 33% say "half-half". The average rating registered for the Budget is 57.0 marks, with a recognition rate of 79%.

Figures on various Financial Secretaries' popularity before and after their Budget Speeches since 2001[11] 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[13]

7/3/2001

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[12]

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 approval rate at Budget instant survey[12]

--

--

--

--

64 +/-3%

61 +/-4%

62 +/-4%

Date of the latest survey before Budget Speech[14]

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[12]

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 approval rate before the Budget[12]

--

--

--

--

--

65 +/-3%

63 +/-3%

Change in FS's rating

-2.2[15]

+6.2[15]

+1.7[15]

+2.5[15]

+3.6[15]

--

+3.3[15]

Change in FS's approval rate

--

--

--

--

--

-4%

-1%


 

Popularity of John Tsang

Year of the Budget

2008-09

2009-2010

2010-2011

2011-2012

2012-2013

Date of Budget Speech[13]

27/2/2008

25/2/2009

24/2/2010

23/2/2011

1/2/2012

FS's rating at Budget instant survey[12]

67.9 +/-1.5

54.9 +/-1.6

61.3 +/-1.4

52.4+/-1.3

54.1+/-1.2

FS's approval rate at Budget instant survey[12]

58 +/-4%

43 +/-4%

53 +/-4%

36 +/-3%

29 +/-3%

Date of the latest survey before Budget Speech

1-5/2/2008

2-4/2/2009

29/1-2/2/2010

7-11/2/2011

3-6/1/2012

FS's rating before the Budget[12]

56.0 +/-1.2

56.7 +/-1.1

58.3 +/-1.1

55.4+/-1.7

50.6+/-1.6

FS's approval rate before the Budget[12]

35 +/-3%

47 +/-3%

57 +/-3%

51+/-4%

37+/-4%

Change in FS's rating

+11.9[15]

-1.8[15]

+3.0[15]

-3.0[15]

+3.5[15]

Change in FS's approval rate

+23%[15]

-4%

-4%

-15%[15]

-8%[15]

[11] FS rating was introduced in our Budget instant poll in 2001, while approval rate was introduced in 2005. This table therefore starts from 2001.
[12] 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.
[13] These questions only use the concerned sub-samples for the tracking surveys between 2006 and 2010.
[14] The frequency of FS rating and approval rate was different before November 2005.
[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.


The survey shows that the latest rating of FS John Tsang after his Budget Talk is 54.1 marks, with approval and disapproval rates of 29% and 26% respectively.


Indepth Analysis

In the survey, we also asked respondents for their age. If they were reluctant to give their exact age, they could give us a range. According to their answers, we grouped them into 18-29, 30-49, and 50 years or older. Herewith further analysis of public's satisfaction rate of the Budget, and John Tsang's rating and approval rates by respondents' age:
Date of survey: 1/2/2012

18-29

30-49

50+

Overall

Satisfaction rate of the
Budget Speech[16]

Satisfaction

29+/-7%
(43)

34+/-5%
(106)

46+/-5%
(166)

38+/-3%
(315)

Half-half

35+/-8%
(52)

40+/-6%
(123)

27+/-5%
(98)

33+/-3%
(273)

Dissatisfaction

32+/-8%
(47)

25+/-5%
(77)

24+/-5%
(88)

26+/-3%
(213)

Don't know /
hard to say

4+/-3%
(6)

1+/-1%
(5)

3+/-2%
(10)

3+/-1%
(21)

Total

100%
(149)

100%
(311)

100%
(362)

100%
(823)

Mean value[16]

2.9+/-0.2
(143)

3.1+/-0.1
(307)

3.2+/-0.1
(352)

3.1+/-0.1
(801)


Date of survey: 1/2/2012

18-29

30-49

50+

Overall

Rating of FS John Tsang

52.2+/-2.2
(192)

51.7+/-1.9
(392)

57.1+/-2.0
(409)

54.0+/-1.2
(993)

Vote of confidence /
no confidence in
FS John Tsang[16]

Support

14+/-5%
(28)

27+/-4%
(108)

38+/-5%
(152)

29+/-3%
(287)

Oppose

30+/-7%
(57)

28+/-5%
(112)

21+/-4%
(86)

26+/-3%
(256)

Don't know /
hard to say

56+/-7%
(109)

44+/-5%
(175)

41+/-5%
(165)

45+/-3%
(449)

Total

100%
(194)

100%
(395)

100%
(403)

100%
(992)

[16] Differences among sub-groups are tested to be statistically significant at 95% confidence level.


Future Releases (Tentative)

  • February 7, 2012 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Budget First follow-up survey
  • February 9, 2012 (Thursday) 1pm to 2pm: Rating of Top Ten Legislative Councillors

| Special Announcement | Abstract | Background | Latest Figures | Indepth Analysis | Future Releases (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (Instant Poll of the 2012 Financial Budget/Popularity of Principal Officials) |