Feb 27, 2020
Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute Press Conference – Press Materials
Detailed Findings
Press Release on February 27, 2020
POP releases findings of Financial Budget instant poll
Special Announcements
- The predecessor of Hong Kong Public Opinion Program (HKPOP) was The Public Opinion Programme at The University of Hong Kong (HKUPOP). “POP” in this release can refer to HKPOP or its predecessor HKUPOP.
- The Budget surveys, including instant and follow-up polls, conducted by POP this year may be the last of its series, whether it will be continued next year or not will depend on public support.
Abstract
After Financial Secretary Paul Chan delivered his Budget Speech yesterday, POP conducted an instant survey on the same day and released some of the findings last night via our media sponsor Apple Daily. Apart from random landline and mobile numbers, this survey also included samples from our “Hong Kong People Representative Panel” (i.e. a panel comprising randomly recruited samples) within “HKPOP Panel”, interviewed by telephone or invited through email to complete an online survey. Our telephone survey began at 4pm till about 8pm, while our online survey started at 1:30pm and ended at 8:30pm yesterday. A total of 1,038 successful cases were collected, including 138 random landline samples, 135 random mobile samples, 183 panel telephone survey samples and 582 panel online survey samples. The raw data was weighted by population statistics and proportions of different sampling frames in order to ensure data representativeness.
Our survey shows that among those who had some knowledge of the fourth Budget Speech by Financial Secretary Paul Chan, 46% were satisfied, 27% were not, giving a net satisfaction rate of positive 19 percentage points. On a scale of 0-100, this Budget scored 54.1 marks. All popularity figures of the Budget have significantly improved compared to last year. As for Paul Chan’s own popularity as Financial Secretary, after the Budget Speech, his rating now stands at 43.5 marks, with net approval of negative 14 percentage points, also significantly improved from that in early February before the Budget Speech. Our instant survey describes people’s instant reaction towards the Budget, how people’s reaction will change after knowing more about the Budget will be revealed by our follow-up survey. The effective response rate of the survey excluding panel samples is 75.5%. The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-3%, that of net values is +/-5% and that of ratings is +/-1.9 at 95% confidence level.
Contact Information
| Date of survey | : | 26/2/2020 |
| Survey method[1] | : | (1a) Random landline telephone survey
(1b) Random mobile telephone survey (2a) Telephone survey targeting “Hong Kong People Representative Panel” within “HKPOP Panel” (2b) Online survey with email invitation targeting “Hong Kong People Representative Panel” within “HKPOP Panel” |
| Target population | : | Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above |
| Sample size[2] | : | 1,038 (including 138 random landline samples, 135 random mobile samples, 183 panel telephone survey samples and 582 panel online survey samples) |
| Effective response rate[3] | : | 75.5% (excluding panel samples) |
| Sampling error[4] | : | Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-3%, that of net values not more than +/-5% and that of ratings not more than +/-1.9 at 95% conf. level |
| Weighting method | : | The raw data comes from 4 different sampling frames. It is rim-weighted by two sets of weighting factors simultaneously. The first set of weighting factors comprises population figures provided by the Census and Statistics Department, they include (a) the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population from “Mid-year population for 2018”, (b) educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution from “Women and Men in Hong Kong – Key Statistics (2018 Edition)”, and (c) economic activity status distribution from the last source. The second set of weighting factors is adjusted based on the relative target sample size of different sub-sampling frames, namely, random telephone survey using landline numbers set at 5 units, random telephone survey using mobile numbers set at 5 units, telephone survey of randomly pre-selected panel members set at 6 units, and online survey of randomly pre-selected panel members set at 4 units. |
[1] Telephone surveys by POP are all conducted by real interviewers.
[2] This figure is the total sample size of the survey. Some questions may only involve a subsample, the size of which can be found in the tables below.
[3] 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.
[4] 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.
Latest Figures
People’s satisfaction figures with this year’s Budget are summarized below together with the previous findings:
| Date of survey | Sub-sample size[5] | Appraisal of Budget | |||||
| Satisfaction rate[6] | Half-half[6] | Dissatisfaction rate[6] | Net satisfaction rate | Mean value[6] | Satisfaction rating of Budget | ||
| 26/2/20 | 991 | 46+/-3%[7] | 23+/-3% | 27+/-3%[7] | 19+/-5%[7] | 3.2+/-0.1[7] | 54.1+/-1.8[7] |
| 27/2/19 | 561 | 23% | 26% | 39% | -16% | 2.7 | 47.1 |
| 28/2/18 | 551 | 26%[7] | 28% | 41%[7] | -14%[7] | 2.7[7] | 48.2[7] |
| 22/2/17 | 502 | 33% | 30% | 18% | 15% | 3.2 | 55.7 |
| 24/2/16 | 500 | 36%[7] | 31% | 20% | 17%[7] | 3.2 | 57.2[7] |
| 25/2/15 | 529 | 45%[7] | 28% | 18%[7] | 28%[7] | 3.3[7] | 60.2[7] |
| 26/2/14 | 695 | 24%[7] | 26%[7] | 45%[7] | -20%[7] | 2.7[7] | 49.8[7] |
| 27/2/13 | 813 | 30%[7] | 37%[7] | 31%[7] | -1%[7] | 2.9[7] | 53.6[7] |
| 1/2/12 | 826 | 38%[7] | 33% | 26%[7] | 12%[7] | 3.1[7] | 57.0[7] |
| 23/2/11 | 911 | 27%[7] | 34% | 35%[7] | -8%[7] | 2.8[7] | 51.5[7] |
| 24/2/10 | 724 | 47%[7] | 35%[7] | 14%[7] | 32%[7] | 3.4[7] | 60.8[7] |
| 25/2/09 | 669 | 30%[7] | 43%[7] | 22%[7] | 8%[7] | 3.1[7] | 54.8[7] |
| 27/2/08 | 811 | 68%[7] | 21%[7] | 5%[7] | 63%[7] | 3.8[7] | 70.6 |
| 28/2/07 | 673 | 62%[7] | 25% | 9%[7] | 53%[7] | 3.6[7] | — |
| 22/2/06 | 577 | 50% | 26% | 19%[7] | 31% | 3.3 | — |
| 16/3/05 | 544 | 47%[7] | 29% | 11% | 36%[7] | 3.4 | — |
| 10/3/04 | 395 | 37%[7] | 33%[7] | 12%[7] | 25%[7] | 3.3[7] | — |
| 5/3/03 | 495 | 20%[7] | 23% | 50%[7] | -30%[7] | 2.5[7] | — |
| 6/3/02 | 539 | 47%[7] | 23% | 17% | 30%[7] | 3.3[7] | — |
| 7-8/3/01 | 263 | 57%[7] | 25%[7] | 13%[7] | 44%[7] | 3.5[7] | — |
| 8/3/00 | 643 | 70%[7] | 12%[7] | 4%[7] | 66%[7] | 3.9[7] | — |
| 3/3/99 | 598 | 46%[7] | 27%[7] | 10%[7] | 36%[7] | 3.4[7] | — |
| 18/2/98 | 638 | 55% | 20% | 7% | 47% | 3.6 | — |
[5] The questions on the appraisal of Budget would exclude respondents who had not heard of / did not have any knowledge of the Budget.
[6] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[7] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is 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.
After excluding those respondents who said they did not have any knowledge of this year’s Budget, this year’s instant survey showed that 46% were satisfied with it, 27% were dissatisfied and 23% said “half-half”, giving a net satisfaction rate of positive 19 percentage points. The mean score is 3.2, which is close to “half-half” in general. Meanwhile, the average rating registered for the Budget was 54.1 marks. All popularity figures of the Budget have significantly improved compared to last year.
Figures on various Financial Secretaries’ popularity before and after their Budget Speeches since 2001 are summarized as follows: [8]
| Popularity
of Donald Tsang |
Popularity of Antony Leung |
Popularity of Henry Tang | ||||||||||||||||
| Date of Budget Speech | 7/3/01 | 6/3/02 | 5/3/03 | 10/3/04 | 16/3/05 | 22/2/06 | 28/2/07 | |||||||||||
| FS’s rating at Budget instant survey | 69.7 | 63.4 | 49.8 | 59.9 | 63.3 | 63.0 | 64.1 | |||||||||||
| FS’s net approval rate at Budget instant survey | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | 59% | 56% | 56% | |||||||||||
| Date of the latest survey before the Budget[9] | 19-21/2/01 | 18-21/2/02 | 1-4/3/03 | 1-3/3/04 | 1-3/3/05 | 3-7/2/06 | 1-6/2/07 | |||||||||||
| FS’s rating before the Budget | 71.9 | 57.2 | 48.1 | 57.4 | 59.7 | 63.0 | 60.8 | |||||||||||
| FS’s net approval rate before the Budget | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | 57% | 50% | |||||||||||
| Change in FS’s rating |
-2.2[10] | +6.2[10] | +1.7[10] | +2.5[10] | +3.6[10] | — | +3.3[10] | |||||||||||
| Change in FS’s net approval rate |
[Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | [Not applicable] | -1% | +6%[10] | |||||||||||
| Popularity of John Tsang | ||||||||||||||||||
| Date of Budget Speech | 27/2/08 | 25/2/09 | 24/2/10 | 23/2/11 | 1/2/12 | 27/2/13 | 26/2/14 | 25/2/15 | 24/2/16 | |||||||||
| FS’s rating at Budget instant survey | 67.9 | 54.9 | 61.3 | 52.4 | 54.1 | 56.6 | 54.0 | 61.0 | 62.2 | |||||||||
| FS’s net approval rate at Budget instant survey | 54% | 28% | 46% | 13% | 3% | 35% | 27% | 44% | 48% | |||||||||
| Date of the latest survey before the Budget | 1-5/2/08 | 2-4/2/09 | 29/1-2/2/10 | 7-11/2/11 | 3-6/1/12 | 1-6/2/13 | 4-6/2/14 | 30/1-4/2/15 | 1-4/2/16 | |||||||||
| FS’s rating before the Budget | 56.0 | 56.7 | 58.3 | 55.4 | 50.6 | 57.8 | 56.7 | 58.6 | 62.3 | |||||||||
| FS’s net approval rate before the Budget | 24% | 32 % | 46 % | 33% | 13% | 45% | 33% | 42% | 51% | |||||||||
| Change in FS’s rating |
+11.9[10] | -1.8[10] | +3.0[10] | -3.0[10] | +3.5[10] | -1.2 | -2.7[10] | +2.4[10] | -0.1 | |||||||||
| Change in FS’s net approval rate |
+30%[10] | -4% | — | -20%[10] | -10%[10] | -10%[10] | -6% | +2% | -3% | |||||||||
| Popularity of Paul Chan | ||||||||||||||||||
| Date of Budget Speech | 22/2/17 | 28/2/18 | 27/2/19 | 26/2/20 | ||||||||||||||
| FS’s rating at Budget instant survey | 47.4 | 44.5 | 40.5 | 43.5+/-1.9 | ||||||||||||||
| FS’s net approval rate at Budget instant survey | 4% | -12% | -31% | -14+/-5% | ||||||||||||||
| Date of the latest survey before the Budget | 6-9/2/17 | 1-6/2/18 | 29/1-8/2/19 | 3-6/2/20 | ||||||||||||||
| FS’s rating before the Budget | 34.0 | 44.3 | 37.6 | 26.6+/-2.3 | ||||||||||||||
| FS’s net approval rate before the Budget | -29% | -12% | -26% | -36+/-6% | ||||||||||||||
| Change in FS’s rating | +13.4[10] | +0.2 | +2.9 | +16.8[10] | ||||||||||||||
| Change in FS’s net approval rate | +33%[10] | — | -4% | +22%[10] | ||||||||||||||
[8] FS rating was introduced in our Budget instant poll in 2001, while approval rate was introduced in 2005. This table therefore starts from 2001.
[9] The frequency of surveys on FS rating and approval rate was different before November 2005.
[10] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is 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 survey showed that the latest popularity rating of Financial Secretary Paul Chan after his Budget Speech was 43.5 marks, with approval and disapproval rates of 27% and 41% respectively, giving a net approval of negative 14 percentage points. All popularity figures have improved significantly compared to early February.
Data Analysis
Our latest Budget instant survey shows that among those who had some knowledge of the fourth Budget Speech by Financial Secretary Paul Chan, 46% were satisfied, 27% were not, giving a net satisfaction rate of positive 19 percentage points. On a scale of 0-100, this Budget scored 54.1 marks. All popularity figures of the Budget have significantly improved compared to last year. As for Paul Chan’s own popularity as Financial Secretary, after the Budget Speech, his rating now stands at 43.5 marks, with net approval of negative 14 percentage points, also significantly improved from that in early February before the Budget Speech. Our instant survey describes people’s instant reaction towards the Budget, how people’s reaction will change after knowing more about the Budget will be revealed by our follow-up survey.