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

Centre for Communication and Public Opinion Survey The Chinese University of Hong Kong Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey Second Round Survey Results (8-15.10.2014) October 2014

Content Content Page Survey Overview 2 Survey Results 3 Profile of Respondents 8 Cross-tables 11 Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 1

Survey Method Survey Overview Random Sampling was adopted for Telephone Interviews conducted by interviewers using CATI (Computer-Assisted Telephone Interview) system Data Collection Period 8 10 13-15 October (Total 6 days) Target Respondents Sampling Method Procedures for handling phone numbers Sample Size Sampling Error Response Rate 37% Hong Kong Citizens aged 15 or above speaking Cantonese All the phone numbers in the latest residential telephone directories were firstly transformed to 6-digit numbers by erasing the last 2 digits. After deleting repeated numbers, a hundred of 2-digit numbers from 00 to 99 were then appended to each number. A database of telephone numbers was finally created and telephone numbers were randomly selected from this database. This method could make the numbers unlisted on the directories may also have chance to be chosen. After successful contact with the household, if there were more than one member at home eligible for an interview, we would employ the Next Birthday Rule method to select the eligible member whose birthday comes soonest. After each dialing, if it was no answer, busy or eligible unavailable etc., computer system would arrange interviewer to try the number again at another day or time. The computer would stop trying that number if there was still no success after 4 attempts. However, if receiving two refusals, attempt will immediately be terminated. 802 Completed Cases Within ±3.5% (at 95% confidence level, which means we have 95% confidence that the sampling error will fall within this range.) The following shows the status of all numbers attempted and the calculation of response rate: Total Numbers Attempted 16043 A. Total numbers with Confirmed Ineligibility for Interview (Ineligibles) 8614 A1. Non-working number 7019 A2. Non-residence 578 A3. Fax / Modem / Pager 866 A4. No eligible Living in 151 B. Total numbers with Unconfirmed Eligibility for Interview (Unknown) 6076 B1. No answer (including answering machine) 2780 B2. Busy 571 B3. Password needed 17 B4. Language Problem 48 B5. Without confirming as a household before hanging up 2660 C. Total numbers with Confirmed Eligibility for Interview (Eligibles) 1353 C1. Refusal (including refusal in the middle of interview) 446 C2. Eligible unavailable in survey period 105 C3. Completed 802 Calculation of response rate: Completed / [Eligibles + Unknown x Eligibles / (Eligibles + Ineligibles)] = 802 / [1353 + 6076 x 1353 / (1353 + 8614)] = 0.3683 (37%) Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 2

Survey Results In order to enable the sample to reflect more closely the characteristics of the Hong Kong population, all data in this survey were weighted against the gender-age-education distribution of those aged 15 or above released by the Census and Statistics Department. Due to the process of weighting and rounding off of decimal place, the sum of individual items in the tables may be different to the total. Table 1: Recently Hong Kong broke out an Occupy Movement, do you personally support the movement? Strongly support, quite support, so-so, quite not support, or strongly not support? N % Strongly Support 150 18.6 Quite Support 154 19.2 So-so 186 23.2 Quite not Support 70 8.7 Strongly not Support 215 26.8 No Opinion / Refuse to Answer 28 3.5 Total 802 100.0 Table 2: Regarding the use of tear gas by police to handle the Occupy Movement, do you think it is appropriate? Very appropriate, quite appropriate, so-so, quite inappropriate and Very Inappropriate N % Very Appropriate 110 13.7 Quite Appropriate 68 8.4 So-so 140 17.5 Quite Inappropriate 124 15.4 Very Inappropriate 307 38.3 No Opinion / Refuse to Answer 53 6.7 Total 802 100.0 Table 3: Regarding the way of police handling the conflict between the supporters and opponents of the Occupy Movement, do you think it is appropriate? Very appropriate, quite appropriate, so-so, quite inappropriate and very inappropriate? N % Very Appropriate 98 12.2 Quite Appropriate 116 14.4 So-so 185 23.1 Quite Inappropriate 159 19.8 Very Inappropriate 180 22.5 No Opinion / Refuse to Answer 64 8.0 Total 802 100.0 Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 3

Table 4: 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? N % Approve 289 36.1 Reject 389 48.5 No Opinion / Refuse to Answer 124 15.4 Total 802 100.0 Table 5: (Only those answered Reject in the previous question about universal suffrage on Chief Executive election have to answer this question) If Hong Kong Government proposes a draft for the 2017 one-person one-vote Chief Executive election in which the composition and formation method of the nomination committee is revised in order to reduce political vetting of the candidates, will you accept it? Strongly accept, quite accept, so-so, quite not accept or strongly not accept? N % Valid % Strongly Accept 21 2.7 5.5 Quite Accept 135 16.9 34.8 So-so 164 20.5 42.2 Quite not Accept 22 2.7 5.6 Strongly not Accept 27 3.4 7.0 No Opinion / Refuse to Answer 19 2.4 5.0 Not Required to Answer this Question 413 51.5 Missing Value Total 802 100.0 100.0 Valid Sample= 389 Missing Sample=413 Table 6: (Only those answered Reject in the previous question about universal suffrage on Chief Executive election have to answer this question) If Hong Kong Government proposes a draft for the 2017 one-person one-vote Chief Executive election in which political vetting of the candidates still exists, but the central government pledges to continue to reform the election method of the Chief Executive, will you accept it? Strongly accept, quite accept, so-so, quite not accept or strongly not accept? N % Valid % Strongly Accept 15 1.9 3.9 Quite Accept 54 6.7 13.8 So-so 106 13.2 27.2 Quite not Accept 89 11.1 23.0 Strongly not Accept 117 14.5 30.0 No Opinion / Refuse to Answer 9 1.1 2.2 Not Required to Answer this Question 413 51.5 Missing Value Total 802 100.0 100.0 Valid Sample= 389 Missing Sample=413 Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 4

Table 7: How high is your trust in the Hong Kong police force? 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? N % 0 No Trust at All 75 9.3 1 14 1.8 2 31 3.9 3 46 5.7 4 64 7.9 5 So-so 203 25.3 6 67 8.4 7 81 10.1 8 91 11.4 9 14 1.8 10 Total Trust 100 12.5 Don t Know / Refuse to Answer 16 2.0 Total 802 100.0 Mean # (N) = 5.49 (786) # Don t Know / Refuse to Answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Table 8: 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? N % 0 No Trust at All 111 13.9 1 47 5.8 2 71 8.9 3 88 11.0 4 67 8.3 5 So-so 190 23.7 6 57 7.2 7 46 5.7 8 61 7.6 9 7 0.9 10 Total Trust 38 4.7 Don t Know / Refuse to Answer 19 2.3 Total 802 100.0 Mean # (N) = 4.17 (783) # Don t Know / Refuse to Answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 5

Table 9: 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? N % 0 No Trust at All 154 19.2 1 41 5.1 2 58 7.3 3 76 9.5 4 50 6.2 5 So-so 166 20.7 6 52 6.5 7 42 5.2 8 49 6.1 9 14 1.8 10 Total Trust 63 7.8 Don t Know / Refuse to Answer 37 4.6 Total 802 100.0 Mean # (N) = 4.14 (765) # Don t know / Refuse to answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Table 10: 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? N % 0 Extremely pessimistic 77 9.6 1 18 2.3 2 27 3.4 3 95 11.9 4 85 10.6 5 So-so 271 33.8 6 96 12.0 7 57 7.1 8 38 4.8 9 3 0.4 10 Extremely Optimistic 27 3.3 Don t Know / Refuse to Answer 8 1.0 Total 802 100.0 Mean # (N) = 4.57 (794) # Don t know / Refuse to answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 6

Table 11: Are you considering migration to overseas? N % Yes 173 21.6 No 623 77.7 Don t Know / Refuse to Answer 6 0.7 Total 802 100.0 Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 7

Profile of Respondents Table 12: Gender Before weighting Weighted N % N % Male 388 48.4 385 48.0 Female 414 51.6 417 52.0 Total 802 100.0 802 100.0 Table 13: Age Before weighting Weighted N % N % 15 17 51 6.4 32 4.0 18 19 30 3.7 21 2.6 20 24 52 6.5 59 7.3 25-29 45 5.6 60 7.5 30 34 45 5.6 64 8.0 35-39 50 6.2 65 8.0 40-44 92 11.5 70 8.7 45 49 72 9.0 76 9.5 50 54 99 12.3 84 10.5 55 59 76 9.5 74 9.2 60 64 75 9.4 58 7.2 65 69 55 6.9 39 4.8 70 or Above 54 6.7 95 11.9 Refuse to Answer 6 0.7 6 0.8 Total 802 100.0 802 100.0 Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 8

Table 14: Educational Level Before weighting Weighted N % N % No Education / Kindergarten 9 1.1 32 4.1 Primary 63 7.9 106 13.2 Secondary (F.1 to F.3) 114 14.2 105 13.2 Secondary (F.4 to F.5) 222 27.7 216 26.9 Secondary (F.6 to F.7) 98 12.2 63 7.8 Post-secondary (non-degree) 69 8.6 68 8.5 Bachelor Degree 180 22.4 164 20.5 Graduate Studies(Master or above) 42 5.2 42 5.2 Refuse to Answer 5 0.6 6 0.7 Total 802 100.0 802 100.0 Table15: Political Orientation Before weighting Weighted N % N % Radical democrats 23 2.9 25 3.1 Moderate democrats 288 35.9 267 33.3 Middle/neutral 218 27.2 217 27.1 Pro-establishment 39 4.9 38 4.8 Business-industrial 10 1.2 8 1.0 Pro-Beijing 29 3.6 30 3.7 No orientation / not belonging to any orientation Don t Know/ Hard to say / Refuse to 166 20.7 182 22.7 29 3.6 35 4.3 answer Total 802 100.0 1006 100.0 Question: You consider yourself leaning toward which political orientation? Radical democrats, moderate democrats, middle-neutral, pro-establishment, business-industrial, or pro-beijing? Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 9

Table 16: Monthly Household Income Before weighting Weighted N % N % $9,999 or Below 86 10.7 111 13.8 $10,000 - $14,999 51 6.4 53 6.6 $15,000 - $19,999 48 6.0 47 5.9 $20,000 - $24,999 89 11.1 90 11.2 $25,000 - $29,999 47 5.9 45 5.6 $30,000 - $39,999 116 14.5 112 13.9 $40,000 - $49,999 80 10.0 79 9.9 $50,000 - $59,999 70 8.7 64 7.9 $60,000 - $99,999 88 11.0 77 9.6 $100,000 or Above 36 4.5 30 3.8 Don t Know/Refuse to Answer 91 11.3 94 11.7 Total 802 100.0 802 100.0 Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 10

Cross-tables Table 17: Recently Hong Kong broke out an Occupy Movement, do you personally support the movement? Strongly support, quite support, so-so, quite not support, or strongly not support? Not No Views Support So-so Total (N) Support / Refuse Sex M 38.7% 22.5% 34.8% 4.1% 100.0% (385) F 37.1% 23.9% 36.1% 2.9% 100.0% (417) Age 15 24 62.1% 30.1% 7.7% 0.0% 100.0% (112) 25 39 46.2% 26.6% 25.7% 1.4% 100.0% (189) 40 59 28.4% 22.8% 44.7% 4.1% 100.0% (303) 60 or Above 29.6% 16.8% 47.1% 6.5% 100.0% (192) Edu Level F3 or Below 27.4% 20.1% 46.0% 6.5% 100.0% (244) F.4 F.7 39.0% 25.1% 33.1% 2.8% 100.0% (279) Tertiary or Above 46.7% 24.2% 27.6% 1.5% 100.0% (274) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 66.3% 20.0% 12.7% 1.0% 100.0% (292) Middle-neutral 26.6% 28.9% 39.3% 5.2% 100.0% (217) Pro-establishment* 1.4% 11.8% 86.7% 0.0% 100.0% (77) No orientation 21.2% 26.6% 45.4% 6.8% 100.0% (182) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 31.3% 20.2% 44.5% 4.1% 100.0% (164) 15,000-24,999 36.7% 27.2% 34.9% 1.2% 100.0% (137) 25,000-39,999 43.7% 26.1% 29.7% 0.6% 100.0% (157) 40,000-59,999 44.4% 22.0% 31.9% 1.7% 100.0% (143) 60,000 or Above 35.4% 21.7% 40.1% 2.9% 100.0% (108) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 11

Table 18: Regarding the use of tear gas by police to handle the Occupy Movement, do you think it is appropriate? Very appropriate, quite appropriate, so-so, quite inappropriate and Very Inappropriate Not No Views Appropriate So-so Total (N) Appropriate / Refuse Sex M 23.7% 14.3% 56.1% 5.9% 100.0% (385) F 20.7% 20.4% 51.5% 7.4% 100.0% (417) Age 15 24 1.4% 15.9% 81.5% 1.1% 100.0% (112) 25 39 15.5% 21.4% 60.1% 3.1% 100.0% (189) 40 59 26.4% 18.1% 47.6% 7.9% 100.0% (303) 60 or Above 34.8% 13.6% 40.2% 11.4% 100.0% (192) Edu Level F3 or Below 32.4% 16.1% 40.1% 11.4% 100.0% (244) F.4 F.7 20.5% 15.6% 58.9% 5.0% 100.0% (279) Tertiary or Above 14.4% 20.1% 61.4% 4.2% 100.0% (274) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 9.0% 12.4% 77.8% 0.8% 100.0% (292) Middle-neutral 21.9% 23.5% 47.0% 7.6% 100.0% (217) Pro-establishment* 64.0% 18.9% 10.6% 6.5% 100.0% (77) No orientation 26.0% 17.6% 41.5% 14.9% 100.0% (182) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 32.1% 15.0% 44.9% 8.0% 100.0% (164) 15,000-24,999 17.6% 23.3% 58.4% 0.8% 100.0% (137) 25,000-39,999 21.7% 19.2% 54.5% 4.7% 100.0% (157) 40,000-59,999 17.9% 14.0% 64.0% 4.1% 100.0% (143) 60,000 or Above 20.5% 21.4% 50.0% 8.1% 100.0% (108) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 12

Table 19: Regarding the way of police handling the conflict between the supporters and opponents of the Occupy Movement, do you think it is appropriate? Very appropriate, quite appropriate, so-so, quite inappropriate and very inappropriate? Gender Appropriate So-so Not Appropriate No opinion / Refuse to Answer M 27.7% 24.7% 41.6% 6.0% 100.0% (385) F 25.7% 21.7% 42.9% 9.8% 100.0% (417) Total (N) Age 15 24 2.3% 22.5% 72.4% 2.9% 100.0% (112) 25 39 19.0% 25.6% 49.7% 5.7% 100.0% (189) 40 59 32.0% 23.8% 35.6% 8.6% 100.0% (303) 60 or Above 40.5% 19.4% 27.8% 12.4% 100.0% (192) Edu Level F.3 or Below 35.4% 21.5% 30.6% 12.5% 100.0% (244) F.4 F.7 22.3% 25.3% 44.1% 8.3% 100.0% (279) Tertiary or Above 22.5% 22.4% 51.3% 3.8% 100.0% (274) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 11.8% 20.9% 65.6% 1.7% 100.0% (292) Middle-neutral 28.0% 30.5% 34.1% 7.4% 100.0% (217) Pro-establishment* 80.1% 8.3% 10.0% 1.6% 100.0% (77) No orientation 28.3% 25.9% 26.9% 18.8% 100.0% (182) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 35.6% 18.6% 32.2% 13.5% 100.0% (164) 15,000-24,999 22.0% 26.2% 46.5% 5.3% 100.0% (137) 25,000-39,999 22.8% 25.2% 47.0% 4.9% 100.0% (157) 40,000-59,999 23.5% 26.1% 46.9% 3.5% 100.0% (143) 60,000 or Above 32.3% 24.1% 38.7% 4.9% 100.0% (108) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 13

Table 20: 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? No Views Approve Reject Total (N) / Refuse Sex M 40.5% 49.9% 9.7% 100.0% (385) F 32.0% 47.2% 20.8% 100.0% (417) Age 15 24 21.6% 71.7% 6.7% 100.0% (112) 25 39 31.2% 58.5% 10.3% 100.0% (189) 40 59 42.0% 44.8% 13.1% 100.0% (303) 60 or Above 40.5% 31.1% 28.4% 100.0% (192) Edu Level F3 or Below 42.2% 29.2% 28.6% 100.0% (244) F.4 F.7 35.8% 54.4% 9.8% 100.0% (279) Tertiary or Above 30.8% 59.9% 9.2% 100.0% (274) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 21.1% 73.4% 5.5% 100.0% (292) Middle-neutral 40.0% 47.5% 12.5% 100.0% (217) Pro-establishment* 77.5% 11.6% 10.9% 100.0% (77) No orientation 40.8% 29.6% 29.7% 100.0% (182) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 38.8% 35.6% 25.6% 100.0% (164) 15,000-24,999 36.9% 51.7% 11.4% 100.0% (137) 25,000-39,999 35.6% 54.2% 10.2% 100.0% (157) 40,000-59,999 36.5% 57.6% 5.9% 100.0% (143) 60,000 or Above 41.1% 52.4% 6.5% 100.0% (108) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 14

Table 21: (Only those answered Reject in the previous question about universal suffrage on Chief Executive election have to answer this question) If Hong Kong Government proposes a draft for the 2017 one-person one-vote Chief Executive election in which the composition and formation method of the nomination committee is revised in order to reduce political vetting of the candidates, will you accept it? Strongly accept, quite accept, so-so, quite not accept or strongly not accept? Sex Accept So-so Not Accept No Views / Refuse Total M 41.0% 38.9% 13.6% 6.5% 100.0% (192) F 39.5% 45.5% 11.6% 3.5% 100.0% (197) (N) Age 15 24 46.9% 39.8% 10.3% 3.0% 100.0% (80) 25 39 30.4% 48.5% 16.7% 4.4% 100.0% (111) 40 59 44.9% 41.2% 9.1% 4.7% 100.0% (136) 60 or Above 37.5% 38.2% 14.9% 9.3% 100.0% (60) Edu Level F3 or Below 42.7% 35.5% 16.4% 5.3% 100.0% (71) F.4 F.7 39.9% 41.5% 13.3% 5.3% 100.0% (152) Tertiary or Above 39.3% 45.8% 10.3% 4.5% 100.0% (164) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 40.8% 41.9% 12.2% 5.2% 100.0% (214) Middle-neutral 49.4% 38.2% 10.4% 2.0% 100.0% (103) Pro-establishment* 26.1% 47.2% 26.7% 0.0% 100.0% (9) No orientation 26.1% 47.6% 16.8% 9.5% 100.0% (54) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 39.4% 35.9% 14.8% 9.9% 100.0% (58) 15,000-24,999 42.0% 49.0% 4.4% 4.6% 100.0% (71) 25,000-39,999 30.2% 46.4% 16.1% 7.2% 100.0% (85) 40,000-59,999 39.5% 43.4% 16.3% 0.8% 100.0% (82) 60,000 or Above 44.3% 40.7% 9.7% 5.2% 100.0% (56) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 15

Table 22: (Only those answered Reject in the previous question about universal suffrage on Chief Executive election have to answer this question) If Hong Kong Government proposes a draft for the 2017 one-person one-vote Chief Executive election in which political vetting of the candidates still exists, but the central government pledges to continue to reform the election method of the Chief Executive, will you accept it? Strongly accept, quite accept, so-so, quite not accept or strongly not accept? Sex Accept So-so Not Accept No Views / Refuse Total M 17.1% 21.0% 59.1% 2.8% 100.0% (192) F 18.2% 33.2% 47.0% 1.7% 100.0% (197) (N) Age 15 24 15.8% 23.0% 60.4% 0.8% 100.0% (80) 25 39 16.7% 27.5% 55.8% 0.0% 100.0% (111) 40 59 21.9% 27.8% 45.7% 4.6% 100.0% (136) 60 or Above 12.9% 30.5% 53.7% 3.0% 100.0% (60) Edu Level F3 or Below 15.9% 39.4% 39.1% 5.6% 100.0% (71) F.4 F.7 20.5% 22.4% 55.1% 2.0% 100.0% (152) Tertiary or Above 16.0% 25.5% 57.6% 1.0% 100.0% (164) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 12.3% 23.6% 62.1% 1.9% 100.0% (214) Middle-neutral 25.6% 28.6% 45.0% 0.8% 100.0% (103) Pro-establishment* 55.3% 17.6% 27.1% 0.0% 100.0% (9) No orientation 17.7% 32.7% 44.6% 5.0% 100.0% (54) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 19.8% 35.3% 38.0% 7.0% 100.0% (58) 15,000-24,999 20.4% 18.2% 60.8% 0.7% 100.0% (71) 25,000-39,999 16.8% 28.0% 53.1% 2.0% 100.0% (85) 40,000-59,999 10.3% 31.0% 58.1% 0.6% 100.0% (82) 60,000 or Above 22.8% 18.7% 55.1% 3.3% 100.0% (56) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 16

Table 23: How high is your trust in the Hong Kong police force? 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? 0-4 6 10 No opinion 5 Tend to Tend to / Refuse to Total (N) Mean # So-so Not Trust Trust Answer Gender M 32.3% 22.0% 43.7% 2.0% 100.0% (385) 5.41 F 25.2% 28.4% 44.4% 1.9% 100.0% (417) 5.55 Age 15 24 51.9% 19.3% 28.0% 0.7% 100.0% (112) 4.13 25 39 36.0% 23.3% 40.1% 0.7% 100.0% (189) 5.11 40 59 22.8% 24.9% 51.7% 0.6% 100.0% (303) 5.76 60 or Above 16.3% 31.4% 46.1% 6.2% 100.0% (192) 6.31 Edu Level F.3 or Below 21.2% 32.0% 42.2% 4.7% 100.0% (244) 5.72 F.4 F.7 29.6% 24.8% 44.5% 1.1% 100.0% (279) 5.41 Tertiary or Above 34.8% 20.1% 44.7% 0.5% 100.0% (274) 5.31 Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 49.1% 22.5% 28.0% 0.4% 100.0% (292) 4.33 Middle-neutral 23.2% 26.5% 49.2% 1.0% 100.0% (217) 5.79 Pro-establishment* 1.5% 13.5% 85.0% 0.0% 100.0% (77) 8.21 No orientation 17.0% 28.6% 49.5% 4.9% 100.0% (182) 5.87 Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 21.9% 27.2% 43.2% 7.8% 100.0% (164) 6.07 15,000-24,999 33.1% 33.5% 33.4% 0.0% 100.0% (137) 4.82 25,000-39,999 34.5% 16.4% 48.5% 0.6% 100.0% (157) 5.51 40,000-59,999 27.9% 27.6% 43.7% 0.9% 100.0% (143) 5.38 60,000 or Above 25.5% 17.1% 57.4% 0.0% 100.0% (108) 5.96 *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. # No Opinion/ Refuse to Answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 17

Table 24: 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? 0-4 6 10 No opinion 5 Tend to Tend to / Refuse to Total (N) Mean # So-so Not Trust Trust Answer Gender M 51.1% 19.7% 26.9% 2.3% 100.0% (385) 4.09 F 45.0% 27.4% 25.3% 2.3% 100.0% (417) 4.24 Age 15 24 72.1% 14.4% 12.8% 0.7% 100.0% (112) 3.12 25 39 63.7% 17.3% 19.1% 0.0% 100.0% (189) 3.48 40 59 39.2% 28.5% 32.0% 0.3% 100.0% (303) 4.59 60 or Above 31.8% 27.8% 32.2% 8.2% 100.0% (192) 4.90 Edu Level F.3 or Below 32.8% 36.6% 23.7% 6.9% 100.0% (244) 4.64 F.4 F.7 52.3% 19.0% 28.4% 0.3% 100.0% (279) 4.05 Tertiary or Above 57.8% 17.2% 25.0% 0.0% 100.0% (274) 3.86 Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 71.1% 15.0% 13.9% 0.0% 100.0% (292) 2.96 Middle-neutral 44.1% 24.5% 28.9% 2.5% 100.0% (217) 4.41 Pro-establishment* 4.2% 24.1% 71.7% 0.0% 100.0% (77) 7.18 No orientation 35.9% 34.9% 25.0% 4.2% 100.0% (182) 4.54 Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 36.7% 29.4% 27.6% 6.3% 100.0% (164) 4.67 15,000-24,999 47.7% 30.0% 22.3% 0.0% 100.0% (137) 4.04 25,000-39,999 49.5% 21.9% 27.9% 0.6% 100.0% (157) 4.06 40,000-59,999 57.3% 15.7% 27.0% 0.0% 100.0% (143) 3.96 60,000 or Above 51.6% 22.3% 26.1% 0.0% 100.0% (108) 4.13 *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. # No Opinion/ Refuse to Answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 18

Table 25: 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? 0-4 6 10 No opinion 5 Tend to Tend to / Refuse to Total (N) Mean # So-so Not Trust Trust Answer Gender M 46.4% 17.8% 31.6% 4.3% 100.0% (385) 4.39 F 48.1% 23.4% 23.7% 4.9% 100.0% (417) 3.92 Age 15 24 79.5% 11.7% 7.5% 1.3% 100.0% (112) 2.64 25 39 62.8% 16.8% 19.8% 0.7% 100.0% (189) 3.28 40 59 35.4% 28.3% 33.6% 2.7% 100.0% (303) 4.75 60 or Above 31.6% 18.4% 37.5% 12.5% 100.0% (192) 5.09 Edu Level F.3 or Below 33.3% 24.7% 32.1% 9.8% 100.0% (244) 4.83 F.4 F.7 50.6% 21.0% 26.2% 2.2% 100.0% (279) 3.97 Tertiary or Above 57.2% 16.9% 24.2% 1.7% 100.0% (274) 3.72 Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 69.8% 17.3% 12.2% 0.6% 100.0% (292) 2.70 Middle-neutral 48.3% 20.5% 28.1% 3.1% 100.0% (217) 4.26 Pro-establishment* 3.8% 14.1% 79.8% 2.2% 100.0% (77) 7.68 No orientation 32.0% 27.0% 31.2% 9.8% 100.0% (182) 4.88 Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 34.6% 22.9% 32.8% 9.7% 100.0% (164) 4.84 15,000-24,999 51.4% 26.1% 21.4% 1.2% 100.0% (137) 3.86 25,000-39,999 50.7% 19.3% 27.3% 2.7% 100.0% (157) 3.87 40,000-59,999 55.8% 15.7% 27.3% 1.3% 100.0% (143) 3.89 60,000 or Above 49.4% 23.5% 25.9% 1.2% 100.0% (108) 4.13 *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. # No Opinion/ Refuse to Answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 19

Table 26: 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? Gender 0-4 Tend to Pessimistic 5 So-so 6 10 Tend to Optimistic No opinion / Refuse to Answer Total (N) Mean # M 40.3% 30.3% 28.6% 0.8% 100.0% (385) 4.52 F 35.2% 37.0% 26.6% 1.1% 100.0% (417) 4.61 Age 15 24 51.7% 16.6% 31.6% 0.0% 100.0% (112) 4.56 25 39 52.3% 21.7% 26.0% 0.0% 100.0% (189) 4.15 40 59 29.0% 39.4% 31.1% 0.5% 100.0% (303) 4.93 60 or Above 29.6% 46.3% 21.3% 2.8% 100.0% (192) 4.41 Edu Level F.3 or Below 22.9% 52.1% 22.8% 2.2% 100.0% (244) 4.68 F.4 F.7 41.4% 28.5% 29.5% 0.6% 100.0% (279) 4.47 Tertiary or Above 47.8% 23.2% 28.7% 0.3% 100.0% (274) 4.54 Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 50.2% 25.1% 24.7% 0.0% 100.0% (292) 4.15 Middle-neutral 35.8% 35.8% 27.6% 0.8% 100.0% (217) 4.75 Pro-establishment* 14.9% 37.1% 46.3% 1.7% 100.0% (77) 5.94 No orientation 30.4% 43.5% 25.0% 1.1% 100.0% (182) 4.58 Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 33.2% 38.4% 25.1% 3.3% 100.0% (164) 4.39 15,000-24,999 36.3% 34.9% 28.1% 0.7% 100.0% (137) 4.81 25,000-39,999 37.9% 33.6% 28.1% 0.5% 100.0% (157) 4.54 40,000-59,999 43.3% 29.4% 27.3% 0.0% 100.0% (143) 4.47 60,000 or Above 44.8% 22.6% 32.6% 0.0% 100.0% (108) 4.80 *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. # No Opinion/ Refuse to Answer are not included in the calculation of the mean. Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 20

Table 27: Are you considering migration to overseas? Gender Yes No No opinion / Refuse to Answer M 22.6% 76.3% 1.1% 100.0% (385) F 20.6% 79.0% 0.4% 100.0% (417) Total (N) Age 15 24 27.4% 71.8% 0.8% 100.0% (112) 25 39 36.3% 63.1% 0.6% 100.0% (189) 40 59 19.5% 80.3% 0.2% 100.0% (303) 60 or Above 7.6% 91.8% 0.6% 100.0% (192) Edu Level F.3 or Below 8.6% 91.4% 0.0% 100.0% (244) F.4 F.7 20.4% 79.0% 0.6% 100.0% (279) Tertiary or Above 34.7% 64.6% 0.7% 100.0% (274) Political Orientation Pan-democrats* 30.8% 68.3% 0.9% 100.0% (292) Middle-neutral 21.5% 78.5% 0.0% 100.0% (217) Pro-establishment* 6.0% 93.2% 0.8% 100.0% (77) No orientation 15.4% 84.6% 0.0% 100.0% (182) Monthly Household Income 14,999 or Below 7.6% 92.4% 0.0% 100.0% (164) 15,000-24,999 20.9% 79.1% 0.0% 100.0% (137) 25,000-39,999 25.4% 74.0% 0.6% 100.0% (157) 40,000-59,999 29.5% 69.4% 1.2% 100.0% (143) 60,000 or Above 34.5% 65.5% 0.0% 100.0% (108) *Pan-Democrats mean Radical Democrats and Moderate Democrats; Pro-Establishment includes Business-industrial and Pro-Beijing. -- End -- Hong Kong Public Opinion & Political Development Opinion Survey (Second Round)(8-15.10.2014) 21