Public Opinion & Political Development in Hong Kong. Survey Results. September 21, 2014

Similar documents
Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey Second Round Survey Results

Public Opinion & Political Development in Hong Kong. Survey Results. May 27, 2015

Morrissey leads crowded contest for Richmond mayor; voters sour on current City Council and School Board

EU - Irish Presidency Poll. January 2013

Community perceptions of migrants and immigration. D e c e m b e r

Record Number Favors Removing U.S. Troops from Afghanistan

HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY POLL MEMO RELEASE 10/13/2017 (UPDATE)

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, October, 2015, On Immigration Policy, Wider Partisan Divide Over Border Fence Than Path to Legal Status

Supreme Court s Favorability Edges Below 50%

Trump Effect plays in Virginia governor s race, but Confederate statues may raise a Robert E. Lee Effect

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, February 2014, Public Divided over Increased Deportation of Unauthorized Immigrants

Interview dates: September 6 8, 2013 Number of interviews: 1,007

Appendix for: Authoritarian Public Opinion and the Democratic Peace *

PRRI March 2018 Survey Total = 2,020 (810 Landline, 1,210 Cell) March 14 March 25, 2018

Most opponents reject hearings no matter whom Obama nominates

Borders First a Dividing Line in Immigration Debate

Public Attitudes Survey Bulletin

HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY POLL MEMO RELEASE 9/24/2018 (UPDATE)

Public Attitudes Survey Bulletin

Richmond voters rank schools top issue for next mayor; poll shows dissatisfaction on city finances, transparency

September 2017 Toplines

REPORT TO PROPRIETARY RESULTS FROM THE 48 TH PAN ATLANTIC SMS GROUP. THE BENCHMARK OF MAINE PUBLIC OPINION Issued May, 2011

The Essential Report. 22 August 2017 ESSENTIALMEDIA.COM.AU

SAN PATRICIO & NUECES COS. COMMUNITY SURVEY. March 7-8, 2018 N=406 respondents margin of error: + 4.9%

Little Support for U.S. Intervention in Syrian Conflict

Survey on the Death Penalty

Post-election round-up: New Zealand voters attitudes to the current voting system

NATIONAL: PUBLIC BALKS AT TRUMP MUSLIM PROPOSAL

Release #2345 Release Date: Tuesday, July 13, 2010

THE AP-GfK POLL July, 2014

Gillespie gains, but Warner holds solid lead; voters favor Warner over Gillespie on issues

Arab American Voters in 2010: Their Identity and Political Concerns

Opposition to Syrian Airstrikes Surges

Voters back Amazon deal, sports betting, ERA and independent redistricting commission

NUMBERS, FACTS AND TRENDS SHAPING THE WORLD FOR RELEASE AUGUST 25, 2014 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ON THIS REPORT:

PRESS RELEASE October 15, 2008

PRRI/The Atlantic April 2016 Survey Total = 2,033 (813 Landline, 1,220 Cell phone) March 30 April 3, 2016

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, July, 2014, Most Think the U.S. Has No Responsibility to Act in Iraq

THE AP-GfK POLL September, 2016

NATIONAL: TRUMP RATING TICKS UP; SUPPORT FOR TAX PLAN INCREASES

HIGH POINT UNIVERSITY POLL MEMO RELEASE 2/15/2018 (UPDATE)

******DRAFT***** Muhlenberg College/Morning Call 2016 Pennsylvania Republican Presidential Primary Survey. Mid April Version

Attitudes toward Immigration: Iowa Republican Caucus-Goers

Public Remains Opposed to Arming Syrian Rebels

1. In general, do you think things in this country are heading in the right direction or the wrong direction? Strongly approve. Somewhat approve Net

Stanford University Climate Adaptation National Poll

THE AP-GfK POLL October, 2014

ANNUAL SURVEY REPORT: ARMENIA

NATIONAL: PUBLIC SAYS LET DREAMERS STAY

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, February, 2015, Growing Support for Campaign Against ISIS - and Possible Use of U.S.

Progressives in Alberta

November 2017 Toplines

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, May, 2015, Negative Views of New Congress Cross Party Lines

NATIONAL: RACE RELATIONS WORSEN

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, July, 2015, Negative Views of Supreme Court at Record High, Driven by Republican Dissatisfaction

Public Attitudes Survey Bulletin

Ipsos Poll conducted for Reuters, May 5-9, 2011 NOTE: all results shown are percentages unless otherwise labeled.

Environmentally Sustainable Agriculture Practices

A Study. Investigating Trends within the Jordanian Society regarding Political Parties and the Parliament

PRRI/The Atlantic 2016 Post- election White Working Class Survey Total = 1,162 (540 Landline, 622 Cell phone) November 9 20, 2016

Yes, Registered 100% No, Not Registered -- Male 64 Female Older than 65 25

POLL DATA HIGHLIGHTS SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES BETWEEN REGISTERED DEMOCRATS AND REPUBLICANS.

European Movement Ireland Research Poll. April 2017 Ref:

POLICE SERVICE OF NORTHERN IRELAND 2005/06 QUALITY OF SERVICE SURVEY

Results Embargoed Until Monday, September 25, 2017 at 12:01am

COMMUNITY RESILIENCE STUDY

EMBARGOED. Overcovered: Protesters, Ex-Generals WAR COVERAGE PRAISED, BUT PUBLIC HUNGRY FOR OTHER NEWS

Should New Zealand s national flag be changed?

COMMUNITY PERCEPTIONS OF MIGRANTS AND IMMIGRATION

A Nation Divided: New national poll shows Americans distrust Congress, the media, Hollywood, and even other voters in the U.S.

NATIONAL: FAKE NEWS THREAT TO MEDIA; EDITORIAL DECISIONS, OUTSIDE ACTORS AT FAULT

Public Attitudes to Migrant Workers. Please do not quote or publish without prior permission from the ILO

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, June, 2015, Broad Public Support for Legal Status for Undocumented Immigrants

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, May, 2015, Public Continues to Back U.S. Drone Attacks

2016 Nova Scotia Culture Index

EMBARGOED FOR RELEASE UNTIL MONDAY, OCTOBER 27, am EDT. A survey of Virginians conducted by the Center for Public Policy

Children's Referendum Poll

Flash Eurobarometer 337 TNS political &social. This document of the authors.

Most Say Immigration Policy Needs Big Changes

Public Remains Supportive of Israel, Wary of Iran

PENNSYLVANIA: SMALL LEAD FOR SACCONE IN CD18

THE AP-GfK POLL. Conducted by GfK Roper Public Affairs & Media

Clinton has significant lead among likely Virginia voters; 53% say Trump is racist, but 54% wouldn t trust Clinton

Results Embargoed Until Tuesday, April 24, 2018 at 12:01am

NATIONAL: PUBLIC TAKES SOFTER STANCE ON ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION

American Cancer Society Cancer Action Network, November

Public Opinion & Political Action

NATIONAL: POTUS LESS TRUSTED THAN MEDIA, FAKE NEWS COMES FROM ALL SOURCES

These are the highlights of the latest Field Poll completed among a random sample of 997 California registered voters.

COLORADO LOTTERY 2014 IMAGE STUDY

BY Cary Funk and Lee Rainie

(Full methodological details appended at the end.) *= less than 0.5 percent

Wisconsin Economic Scorecard

Marist College Institute for Public Opinion Poughkeepsie, NY Phone Fax

RECOMMENDED CITATION: Pew Research Center, May, 2015, Free Trade Agreements Seen as Good for U.S., But Concerns Persist

Voters back compromise on Medicaid expansion, support marijuana reform, minimum wage hike

Planning Study Area 1 Burnaby Heights

1 PEW RESEARCH CENTER

Gauging the Impact of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act

Alberta Carbon Levy and Rebate Program Lethbridge Public Opinion Study Winter 2018

Transcription:

Public Opinion & Political Development in Hong Kong Survey Results (Press Release) September 21, 2014 In recent years, controversies over political reforms in Hong Kong have become serious. To gauge people s views on various issues about political development in Hong Kong, the Centre for Communication and Public Opinion Survey at the School of Journalism and Communication, Chinese University of Hong Kong launched a project named Public Opinion and Political Development Studies in August. The Project will conduct telephone interviews and publish the findings regularly for the reference of various parties. The first wave study was conducted in September 10-17, 2014. Using the method of random sampling, the Centre successfully interviewed 1,006 Hong Kong Cantonese-speaking residents aged 15 or above on phone (with a sampling error of 3.1% at 95% confidence level). The response rate was 43%. All data were weighted by the proportion of gender, age and education according to the most recent statistics of people aged 15 or above issued by the Census and Statistics Department of the Hong Kong SAR Government. The summary of the findings are provided below: (1) Whether the Legislative Council should approve or reject the draft for the 2017 election of Hong Kong Chief Executive? Following the decision of the Standing Committee of the People s Congress, Hong Kong Government will propose a draft for the 2017 one-person one-vote Chief Executive election. If the proposed draft will forbid people having different political views from the Central Government to stand for the election, 53.7% respondents consider that the Legislative Council should reject the draft while 29.3% consider that the Legislative Council should approve it. (See Table 1) 1

Further analysis by demographics (See Table 2): The proportion of males is higher than females in both the group which favours rejection and the group which favours approval of the draft by the Legislative Council. There is a higher proportion of females expressing no opinions than males. (Male: 33.3% favour approval, 56.0% favour rejection, 10.7% no opinion; Female: 25.5% favour approval, 51.7% favour rejection; 22.8% no opinion) The lower the age level, the more likely the respondent favours rejection of the draft by the Legislative Council. (Age 15-24: 75.8%; Age 25-39: 65.1%; Age 40-59: 45.3%; Age 60 or above: 42.3%) The higher the educational level, the more likely the respondent favours rejection of the draft by the Legislative Council. (Tertiary or above: 63.5%; F. 4-F.7: 54.4%; F. 3 or below: 41.6%) (2) Whether election method of HK Chief Executive will affect national security? 51.8% respondents disagree (strongly disagree/quite disagree) that how Hong Kong Chief Executive is elected will affect national security; 24.1% respondents agree (strongly agree/quite agree); 19.8% indicated so-so. (See Table 3) (3) Trust in Hong Kong SAR Government Respondents assess their trust in the Hong Kong SAR Government along a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being no trust at all, 10 being total trust, and 5 being so-so. Results show that the mean score for people s trust in HKSAR Government is 4.02. 49.7% respondents tend not to trust the HKSAR Government (score ranging from 0 to 4) and 15.8% give a score 0, i.e., no trust at all. 22.5% respondents tend to trust the HKSAR Government (score ranging from 6 to 10) and 3.5% give a score of 10, i.e., total trust. The trust of 27.3% respondents in HKSAR Government is so-so (a score of 5) (See Table 4) 2

(4) Trust in Central Government Respondents assess their trust in the Central Government along a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being no trust at all, 10 being total trust, and 5 being so-so. Results show that the mean score for people s trust in Central Government is 4.05. 48.5% respondents tend not to trust the Central Government (score ranging from 0 to 4) and 19.6% give a score 0, i.e., no trust at all. 25.0% respondents tend to trust the Central Government (score ranging from 6 to 10) and 6.0% give a score of 10, i.e., total trust. The trust of 24.2% respondents in HKSAR Government is so-so (a score of 5). (See Table 5) (5) Views on Occupy Central 46.3% indicate not support (strongly not support/ quite not support) for the occupy Central movement; 31.3% respondents indicate support (strongly support/quite support). 20.5% respondents are so-so. (See Table 6) Further analysis by demographics (See Table 7): Males tend to support occupy Central more than females (Male: 35.3%; Females: 27.2%) Youngsters tend to support occupy Central more than older generation. (Age 15-24: 46.7%; Age 25-39: 39.8%; Age 40-59: 20.9%; Age 60 or above: 29.5%) The higher educated tend to support occupy Central more than lower educated (Tertiary or above: 39.2%; F. 4-F.7: 26.5%; F. 3 or below: 26.7%) (6) Views on future development of Hong Kong Respondents assess the future of Hong Kong along a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being extremely pessimistic, 10 being extremely optimistic, and 5 being so-so. Results show that the mean score for people s view about Hong Kong s future is 4.22. 45.6% respondents tend to feel pessimistic (score ranging from 0 to 4) and 10.8% give a score 0, i.e., extremely pessimistic. 21.2% respondents tend to feel optimistic (score ranging from 6 to 10) and 3.2% give a score of 10, i.e., extremely optimistic. 32.2% respondents consider Hong 3

Kong s future development so-so (a score of 5). (See Table 8) (7) Migration 77.2% respondents do not consider migration at present; 21.2% do. (See Table 9) (8) Views on police s handling of protests and assemblies in recent years 36.5% respondents consider the way Hong Kong police handles protests and assemblies in recent years not appropriate (very inappropriate/ quite inappropriate); 31.4% consider it appropriate (very appropriate/ quite appropriate); 29.5% consider it so-so. (See Table 10) (9) Political Orientation 39.5% respondents consider themselves to be pan-democrats ( radical democrats and moderate democrats ); 9.1% consider themselves pro-establishment (including pro-beijing and business-industrial ); 24.1% consider themselves middle-neutral ; and 21.5% consider themselves possessing no political orientation. (See Table 11). Further analysis shows that political orientation makes a marked difference in people s views about the approval of the draft for 2017 election of Chief Executive, and the occupy Central movement: Views on whether the Legislative Council should approve or reject the draft for the 2017 election of Hong Kong Chief Executive (See Table 12) Pan-democrat respondents ( radical democrats / moderate democrats ) tend to consider that Legislative Council should reject the draft for the 2017 election of Chief Executive (72.2%) Pro-establishment respondents (including pro-beijing and business-industrial) tend to consider that Legislative Council should approve the draft for the 2017 election of Chief Executive (66.3%) 4

More respondents of middle-neutral (51.6%) or no political orientation (41.6%) consider that Legislative Council should reject the draft for the 2017 election of Chief Executive Views on Occupy Central (See Table 13) Pan-democrat respondents ( radical democrats / moderate democrats ) tend to support occupy Central (52.3%) Pro-establishment respondents (including pro-beijing and business-industrial) tend not to support occupy Central (84.9%) Respondents of middle-neutral (58.7%) or no political orientation (56.9%) tend not to support occupy Central 5

The total N may not add up to 100% due to rounding errors and weighting Table 1: Views on whether the Legislative Council should approve or reject the draft for the 2017 election of Hong Kong Chief Executive Approve 294 29.3 Reject 541 53.7 No Opinion / Refuse to answer 171 17.0 Question: Following the decision of the Standing Committee of the People s Congress, Hong Kong Government will propose a draft for the 2017 one-person one-vote Chief Executive election. If the proposed draft will forbid people having different political views from the Central Government to stand for the election, do you think the Legislative Council at that time should approve the draft or reject it? Table 2::Approve or reject draft for 2017 election of Chief Executive by Demographics Sex Approve Reject No Views / Refuse Total M 33.3% 56.0% 10.7% 100.0% (482) F 25.5% 51.7% 22.8% 100.0% (524) (n) Age 15 24 15.0% 75.8% 9.2% 100.0% (140) 25 39 22.8% 65.1% 12.1% 100.0% (238) 40 59 38.2% 45.3% 16.5% 100.0% (381) 60 or Above 30.6% 42.3% 27.2% 100.0% (241) Edu Level F.3 or Below 28.9% 41.6% 29.5% 100.0% (313) F. 4 F. 7 33.1% 54.4% 12.5% 100.0% (334) Tertiary or Above 26.3% 63.5% 10.2% 100.0% (354) 6

Table 3: Views on whether election method of Chief Executive will affect national security Strongly agree 125 12.4 Quite agree 118 11.7 So-so 199 19.8 Quite disagree 238 23.7 Strongly disagree 283 28.1 No Opinion / Refuse to answer 43 4.2 Question: Some people say that how to elect the Chief Executive of Hong Kong will affect national security. Do you agree with this view? Strongly agree, quite agree, so-so, quite disagree or strongly disagree? Table 4: Trust in Hong Kong SAR Government 0 No trust at all 159 15.8 1 41 4.1 2 74 7.4 3 108 10.8 4 116 11.5 5 So-so 274 27.3 6 77 7.6 7 67 6.6 8 36 3.6 9 11 1.1 10 Total trust 35 3.5 Don t know / Refuse to answer 6 0.6 Mean* (N) = 4.02 (1000) * Don t know / Refuse to answer are not included in the calculation of the mean Question: How high is your trust in the HKSAR Government? Along a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being no trust at all, 10 being total trust, and 5 being so-so, what score will you give? 7

Table 5: Trust in Central Government 0 No trust at all 198 19.6 1 43 4.3 2 64 6.3 3 100 10.0 4 83 8.2 5 So-so 243 24.2 6 66 6.6 7 50 5.0 8 65 6.5 9 10 1.0 10 Total trust 60 6.0 Don t know / Refuse to answer 23 2.3 Mean* (N) = 4.05 (983) * Don t know / Refuse to answer are not included in the calculation of the mean Question: How high is your trust in the Central Government? Along a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being no trust at all, 10 being total trust, and 5 being so-so, what score will you give? Table 6: Views on Occupy Central Strongly support 143 14.2 Quite support 170 16.9 So-so 206 20.5 Quite not support 126 12.5 Strongly not support 340 33.8 No Opinion / Refuse to answer 22 2.2 Question: Some people start an Occupy Central movement to fight for a 2017 election plan for Chief Executive without screening, do you support the movement or not? Strongly support, quite support, so-so, quite not support, or strongly not support? 8

Table 7: Occupy Central by Demographics Sex Support So-So Not Support No Views / Refuse Total M 35.3% 16.9% 46.2% 1.6% 100.0% (482) F 27.2% 23.8% 46.4% 2.6% 100.0% (524) (n) Age 15 24 46.7% 29.5% 22.5% 1.4% 100.0% (140) 25 39 39.8% 27.8% 31.7% 0.7% 100.0% (238) 40 59 20.9% 17.4% 60.8% 0.8% 100.0% (381) 60 or Above 29.5% 12.4% 52.4% 5.8% 100.0% (241) Edu Level F. 3 or Below 26.7% 16.4% 52.8% 4.1% 100.0% (313) F. 4 F. 7 26.5% 22.8% 49.7% 1.0% 100.0% (334) Tertiary or Above 39.2% 22.2% 37.5% 1.1% 100.0% (354) 9

Table 8: Future Development of Hong Kong 0 Extremely pessimistic 109 10.8 1 20 2.0 2 70 7.0 3 137 13.6 4 122 12.1 5 So-So 324 32.2 6 95 9.4 7 58 5.7 8 26 2.6 9 2 0.2 10 Extremely optimistic 32 3.2 Don t know / Refuse to answer 10 1.0 Mean* (N) = 4.22 (996) * Don t know / Refuse to answer are not included in the calculation of the mean Questions: What is your view about the future development of Hong Kong? Along a scale from 0 to 10, with 0 being extremely pessimistic, 10 being extremely optimistic, and 5 being so-so, what score will you give? Table 9: Think of Migration? Yes 214 21.2 No 776 77.2 Don t know / Refuse to answer 16 1.6 Question: Are you considering migration to overseas? 10

Table 10: Police s handling of protests and assemblies in recent years Very appropriate 134 13.3 Quite appropriate 181 18.0 So-so 297 29.5 Quite inappropriate 214 21.3 Very inappropriate 153 15.3 No Opinion / Refuse to answer 26 2.6 Question: What is your view about the way Hong Kong police handles protests and assemblies in recent years? Very appropriate, quite appropriate, so-so, quite inappropriate, or very inappropriate? Table 11: Political Orientation Radical democrats 37 3.7 Moderate democrats 361 35.8 Middle/neutral 243 24.1 Pro-establishment 42 4.1 Business-industrial 19 1.9 Pro-Beijing 31 3.1 No orientation / not belonging to any orientation 216 21.5 Don t Know/ Hard to say / Refuse to answer 58 5.8 Question: You consider yourself leaning toward which political orientation? Radical democrats, moderate democrats, middle-neutral, pro-establishment, business-industrial, or pro-beijing? 11

Table 12: Political orientation and views on approval or rejection of draft for 2017 election plan for Chief Executive by Legislative Council Political orientation Approve Reject No Views / Refuse Total Pan-democrats 18.4% 72.2% 9.4% 100.0% (398) Middle-Neutral 34.4% 51.6% 14.0% 100.0% (243) Pro-establishment 66.3% 23.9% 9.9% 100.0% (92) No orientation 26.6% 41.6% 31.7% 100.0% (216) (n) Table 13: Political orientation and views on occupy Central Political orientation Support So-So Not Support No views / Refuse Total Pan-democrats 52.3% 23.0% 23.1% 1.5% 100.0% (398) Middle-neutral 18.5% 22.3% 58.7% 0.4% 100.0% (243) Pro-establishment 7.2% 7.9% 84.9% -- 100.0% (92) No orientation 18.6% 20.7% 56.9% 3.9% 100.0% (216) (n) For further enquiries, please contact Prof. Paul Lee (Phone: 3943 8689) -- End -- 12