Survey Findings on HKSAR Government’s Popularity in June 2021 Released by Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies at CUHK
A telephone survey was conducted from 11 June to 21 June, 2021 by the Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, The Chinese University of Hong Kong (CUHK) to study the popularity of the HKSAR Government. The major findings are summarised as follows:
Satisfaction with the HKSAR Government. According to the current survey in June 2021, 14.3% of the 703 respondents expressed satisfaction towards the HKSAR Government, 55.3% said they were dissatisfied, and 29.8% answered ‘in-between’. The corresponding figures for May 2021 were 14.9%, 54.9%, and 29.2%, respectively. The statistical analysis shows that the results for June 2021 were not statistically significant different from those of May 2021. However, when comparing the figures with those from June 2020, the difference in percentage distribution between June 2021 and June 2020 was found statistically significant.
Rating of Chief Executive Carrie Lam. The survey in June 2021 indicated that the performance rating of Chief Executive Carrie Lam (with a point scale ranging from 0 to 100, 50 as the passing mark) stood at 29.3 on average, slightly higher than the rating for May 2021 (30.0). But the statistical significance test (t-test) shows that the mean difference between the rating in June 2021 and the rating in May 2021 was not statistically significant. When comparing her current rating (29.3) with that of June 2020 (24.2), the mean difference of the two months was found statistically significant.
Ratings of Three Secretaries. The ratings of the Chief Secretary for Administration (Matthew Cheung), Financial Secretary (Paul Chan) and Secretary for Justice (Teresa Cheng) in June 2021 were 28.6, 31.2 and 20.4 respectively. The corresponding figures in May 2021 were 29.6, 32.4 and 21.9. The comparison of the ratings of the three Secretaries between June 2021 and May 2021 did not find any statistically significant differences. When their ratings in June 2021 were compared with the respective figures in June 2020, except for the Chief Secretary for Administration, statistically significant differences were not found for the Financial Secretary and the Secretary for Justice.
Trust in the HKSAR Government. As of June 2021, 16.4% of the respondents showed trust in the HKSAR Government and 49.1% expressed distrust; 32.7% answered ‘in-between’. The results in May 2021 were 16.9%, 47.7%, and 32.9%, respectively. No statistically significant difference was found in trust in the HKSAR Government between June 2021 and May 2021. When comparing the figure in the current survey with those of June 2020, the difference between the percentages in June 2021 (Trust: 16.4%; Distrust: 49.1%) and the percentages in June 2020 (Trust: 18.1%; Distrust: 58.0%) was observed to be statistically significant.
Trust in the Central Government. Regarding the level of trust in the Central Government in June 2021, 19.1% said they trusted it, 55.3% answered the opposite, and 21.8% said ‘in-between’. The respective figures from May 2021 were 18.7%, 54.1%, and 23.9%. No statistically significant difference was found between June 2021 and May 2021. The difference between the percentages in June 2021 (Trust: 19.1%; Distrust: 55.3%) and those of June 2020 (Trust: 13.9%; Distrust: 66.6%) was found statistically significant.
In conclusion, the current survey results in June 2021 indicate that all the popularity indices (the public satisfaction level of the government performance, the performance rating of the Chief Executive and the three Secretaries, and even the trust in the HKSAR Government and the Central Government) were not significantly different from those in May 2021 (significance test shows the differences are not statistically significant). However, when compared with the survey conducted in June 2020, except the ratings of Financial Secretary and Secretary for Justice, all the other popularity indices were detected significantly different (significance test shows the differences are all statistically significant).
The survey employed a dual-frame sampling design that included both landline and mobile phone numbers. A total of 703 respondents aged 18 or above (landline: 339; mobile: 364) were successfully interviewed, with response rates of 28.7% (landline) and 30.4% (mobile). The sampling error for the sample size of 703 is estimated at plus or minus 3.70 percentage points at the 95% confidence level. Furthermore, the data of this survey was weighted based on the probability of the respondents being selected via dual-frame sampling design and relevant age-sex distribution of the population published by the Census and Statistics Department before analysis.