議員民望:常見問題 
Popularity of Councillors: FAQs

 
   
下列常見問答會隨著社會變化和大眾需要而不斷更新
The content of this FAQ page will be updated from time to time to match societal changes and community needs
   
常見問題 Frequently asked Questions
   
問:如何界定短期、中期、和長期排名? 
Q: How can we define short-, mid- and long-term overall rankings?
   
問:民研計劃可不可以進行「最差議員」調查?
Q:
Can we conduct a survey of "worst performing" Legco members?
   
問:為什麼不逐個行政會議成員進行評分,而要開展「五大」?
Q:
Why start "top 5" instead of individual ratings for all Exco members?
   
問:為什麼是「五大」而非「十大」行政會議非官守議員排名?
Q:
Why compile "top 5" instead of "top 10" non-official Exco member rankings?
   
問:民研計劃為甚洎n進行「立法會成員整體表現的滿意程度」調查?
Q:
Why does POP conduct surveys on "people's satisfaction with the performance of Legco members in general"?
   
問:「立法會成員整體表現的滿意程度」調查與「十大立法會議員評分」調查有沒有重疊?
Q:
Is there any overlap between the surveys on "people's satisfaction with the performance of Legco members" and "ratings of top 10 Legco members"?
   
問:民意調查如何避免訪問傾向支持或反對某某政黨的人士?
Q: How can opinion polls avoid asking supporters or opponents of certain political groups?
   
問:巿民大眾如何得知每次民意調查的樣本資料?
Q:
How can people know the contact information of each survey?
   
問:為什麼民研計劃要計算十大議員在過去4次調查的總結排名?
Q:
Why compile the overall ratings of Legco members in the past 4 surveys?
   
問:除了就個別議員評分外,民研計劃會否考慮把市民對行政會議成員整體表現的滿意程度列作定期調查題目?
Q:Apart from ratings for individual Council members, would POP consider incorporating people's satisfaction of the overall performance of the Executive Councillors into its tracking surveys?
   
常見問題與答案 Frequently asked Questions with Answers
   
問:如何界定短期、中期、和長期排名? 
Q:How can we define short-, mid- and long-term overall rankings?


答:十大議員的短期排名,可以界定為最近一次調查的排名結果,中期排名可以界定為過去12個月的排名結果,而民研計劃暫時沒有發表的議員長期排名,則可以界定為立法會換屆後的排名總結。至於跨屆議員方面,由於議員名單的改變,平均分數會比相對排名更能有效地顯示議員的民望改變。(初版:2006年2月7日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:For our ranking of Legco members, short-term can be defined as findings from our latest survey, while mid-term can be defined as overall rankings over the year past. We have not yet compiled any long-term overall rankings, but they can be defined as overall rankings since the last Legco election. For very long-serving Legco members, it is more appropriate to use average ratings rather than overall rankings due to membership changes. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 7 February 2006)
   
問:民研計劃可不可以進行「最差議員」調查?
Q:
Can we conduct a survey of "worst performing" Legco members?

答:可以,有需要的時候我們絕不迴避。不過,在有限的資源下,我們認為發掘表現卓越者的社會意義比較重大。況且,「最差議員」上榜的原因,可能是因為知名度差,亦可能因為知名度高但惹人討厭,須要區別。相反,名列前茅的「最佳議員」,則一定要在兩項因素中同時表現出眾,方能得到表揚。(初版:2006年2月7日新聞公報之附加資料) 
A
Yes, we can and we will if needed. However, with our limited resources, we think it is more meaningful to find out the best performers. Besides, in defining "poor performance", we may need to quantify whether some councillors are poor because they fail to make themselves known, or poor because they are notorious. For the best performers, they must be good in both dimensions. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 7 February 2006)

   
問:為什麼不逐個行政會議成員進行評分,而要開展「五大」?
Q:
Why start "top 5" instead of individual ratings for all Exco members?

答:自2003年7月開始,民研計劃一直就所有行政會議成員進行個別評分,當中包括官守成員、非官守議員、列席成員中央政策組首席顧問和列席成員行政長官辦公室主任,在2005年10月改組前最多涉及22人。特首曾蔭權去年10月把非官守議員的數目再增加8人,民研計劃為了配合發展,除了為14名問責官員繼續進行個別評分外,只會就巿民最熟悉的五大行政會議非官守議員進行調查,減輕負荷。(初版:2006年2月14日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:Since July 2003, POP has been measuring the popularity ratings of all individual Exco members, including the official members, non-official members, and two sit-in members, namely, the Head of Central Policy Unit and the Director of Chief Executive’s Office. At one time before the last revamp in October 2005, a total of 22 members were rated individually. Last October, CE Donald Tsang further increased the number of non-official members by 8. POP therefore made parallel changes by introducing the "top 5" exercise, in additional to the regular individual rating of all 14 principal officials, in order to save resources. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 14 February 2006)
   
問:為什麼是「五大」而非「十大」行政會議非官守議員排名?
Q:
Why compile "top 5" instead of "top 10" non-official Exco member rankings?

答:經驗顯示,巿民對行政會議非官守議員的認識程度普遍偏低,採用「五大」排名已經足夠。倘若採用「十大」,可能會浪廢名額。(初版:2006年2月14日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:Experience shows that most non-official Exco members have low recognition rates. Using "top 5" should be enough to register the popularity of the most well-known members. "Top 10" could be a waste. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 14 February 2006)
   
問:民研計劃為甚洎n進行「立法會成員整體表現的滿意程度」調查?
Q:
Why does POP conduct surveys on "people's satisfaction with the performance of Legco members in general"?

答:九七回歸後,民研計劃除了不斷測試「民主」、「自由」、「繁榮」、「安定」等核心主觀指標的變化外,亦同步測試特區政府在「推行民主步伐」、「維護人權自由」、「維持經濟繁榮」和「改善民生」等多方面的表現。在官員和議員的層次,民研計劃又同步測試巿民對「司級官員」、「行政會議員」和「立法會議員」的整體表現評價,作為特區不同權力核心的認受指標。及後,由於問責官員制度出現,行政會議又分成不同種類的成員,前兩者的整體表現調查便漸次被個別人物評分取代,但有關立法會議員整體表現的調查則維持至今。(初版:2006年3月28日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:After the handover of Hong Kong in 1997, POP has not only continued to track the changes of core subjective indicators like "democracy", "freedom", "prosperity" and "stability", we have also tracked in parallel the performance of the SARG on "pace of democratic development", "protecting human rights and freedom", "maintaining economic prosperity" and "improving people's livelihood". On the level of officials and councillors, POP also concurrently measures people's appraisal of the performance of "policy secretaries", "Executive Councillors" and "Legislative Councillors" in general, as indicators of people's recognition of different power organs in the government. With the subsequent emergence of the accountability system for principal officials, and the differentiation of Executive Council members into different categories, the first two items became gradually replaced by popularity ratings for different individuals. The surveys on people's satisfaction with the performance of Legco members in general have been kept up to this date. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 28 March 2006)
   
問:「立法會成員整體表現的滿意程度」調查與「十大立法會議員評分」調查有沒有重疊?
Q:
Is there any overlap between the surveys on "people's satisfaction with the performance of Legco members" and "ratings of top 10 Legco members"?

答:兩者沒有必然關係。立法會議員整體表現是指所有60個議員給予巿民的印象,包括所有於地區直選和功能組別當選的議員。「十大立法會議員評分」是指十個巿民最熟悉議員的個人評分。(初版:2006年3月28日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:There is no logical connection between them. The performance of Legco members in general indicates people's impression of all 60 councillors, including members returned by geographical and functional constituencies. "Ratings of top 10 Legco members" refer to individual rating of the 10 most well-known councillors. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 28 March 2006)
   
問:民意調查如何避免訪問傾向支持或反對某某政黨的人士?
Q:
How can opinion polls avoid asking supporters or opponents of certain political groups?

答:民意調查毋須避免訪問傾向支持或反對某某政黨的人士。重要的是調查樣本中持不同意見的被訪者,比例要與所有目標對象相同。因此便要使用科學隨機抽樣方法。民研計劃一般都是從住宅電話簿中隨機抽樣,然後再從住戶成員中抽取其中一人進行訪問。這個方法是當今社會調查常用的方法,比街頭訪問優勝很多。(初版:2006年5月9日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:Opinion polls do not need to avoid asking supporters or opponents of political groups. The important point is to make sure that the proportions of respondents in favour of certain opinions are the same as those in the target population. We therefore need to use scientific random sampling method. POP normally randomly samples telephone numbers from telephone directories, and then samples one respondent from the target household for interview. This method is often used in contemporary social surveys, and is much better than street interviews. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 9 May 2006)
   
問:巿民大眾如何得知每次民意調查的樣本資料?
Q:
How can people know the contact information of each survey?

答:民研計劃在每次的民調發放中,都詳細交待該調查的訪問對象和調查方法,包括抽樣方法、被訪者背景資料、問卷全文和其他樣本資料。根據國際標準,交待有關資料是發放和報導民調機構的基本責任。(初版:2006年5月9日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:POP's practice is to give detailed contact information of every survey whenever the survey is released, including the definition of target population and its research design, which includes the sampling method, the demographic background of the respondents, the questionnaire in full, and other contact information. According to international standards, providing such information is the responsibility of any organization when releasing or reporting the survey results. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 9 May 2006)
   
問:為什麼民研計劃要計算十大議員在過去4次調查的總結排名?
Q:
Why compile the overall ratings of Legco members in the past 4 surveys?

答:民研計劃自2005年11月開始,便會在公佈十大議員最新評分時,同時公佈十大議員在過去4次調查,即大約一年時間的總結排名,作為短期排名以外,一項屬於中期排名的參考資料。中期排名的計算方法是先按照十大議員在過去4次調查的上榜次數排列,然後再按照議員在該等調查的平均分數排列。由於總結排名是按照多次調查結果計算,排名波動比較穩定,但就對最新發展的反應比較遲鈍,可謂有利有弊,但不失為有用的參考指標。(初版:2006年8月1日新聞公報之附加資料)
A:Starting from November 2005, when releasing the latest ratings of top 10 Legco members, we also release the overall ranking of these Lego members in the past 4 surveys, which roughly span over a year. Our purpose is to compile an indicator to show the mid-term popularity of the Legco members. Our overall rankings are determined first by ranking the number of times individual Legco members appear on our top 10 list in the last 4 surveys, and then rank them according to their average ratings in those surveys. Because these overall rankings are based on results obtained over an extended period of time, they are relatively more stable, but are less sensitive to recent changes. There are, therefore, pros and cons, but the overall rankings should still be useful indicators of popularity change. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 1 August 2006)
   
問:除了就個別議員評分外,民研計劃會否考慮把市民對行政會議成員整體表現的滿意程度列作定期調查題目?
Q:
Apart from ratings for individual Council members, would POP consider incorporating people's satisfaction of the overall performance of the Executive Councillors into its tracking surveys?

答:我們在2006年8月15日的新聞公報中,簡單介紹了我們的「行政會議成員民望調查」,轉載如下:
  • 行政會議是香港憲制的重要組成部分,監察整個行政會議組織以至個別成員的民望變化是順理成章的事,香港大學民意研究計劃自回歸開始便進行有關工作。
  • 1997年7月開始,民研計劃每月進行一次調查,提問為「你對特區政府行政會議成員既整體表現滿唔滿意?」2000年7月開始,調查頻率改為每兩個月一次,直至2002年5月為止。
  • 2002年8月至2005年2月期間,民研計劃改用更加具體的提問方法,每6個月進行一次,提問方法為「你認為某某某、某某某、某某某……做行政會議非官方議員既工作做得好唔好?」
  • 與此同時,在2003年7月至2005年10月之間,民研計劃又每3個月就個別非官守成員進行民望評分,提問方法是「請你用0至100分評價你對行政會議非官守成員某某某既支持程度,0分代表絕對唔支持,100分代表絕對支持,50分代表一半半,你會俾幾多分行政會議非官守成員某某某?」評分對象包括所有非官守議員及列席成員,當中包括中央政策組首席顧問和行政長官辦公室主任,在2005年10月改組前最多涉及22人。至於行政會議官守成員(亦即問責官員)的評分就更加頻密,日後會另文解釋。
  • 2005年10月,特首曾蔭權把非官守議員的數目增加8人,民研計劃為了配合發展和減輕負荷,於是開展「五大巿民最熟悉行政會議非官守議員」的評分調查,取代過往就所有議員進行個別評分調查。「五大議員」調查分為提名和評分兩個階段,週期維持在每3個月進行一次。

由此可見,民研計劃是按照政制發展的步伐、巿民的關注程度和研究資源的考慮,不斷與時並進,調整調查的方法、頻率和發放形式。
換言之,民研計劃的確在1997年7月至2002年5月期間採用了「你對特區政府行政會議成員既整體表現滿唔滿意?」的提問和調查方法。及後的改變,主要是因為前任特首董建華在2002年中推行,「主要官員問責制」,以合約方式聘用14名司局長,並把他們全部委任為行政會議,民研計劃因而須要改動調查方式,呼應這個轉變。現任特首曾蔭權在去年10月改組行政會議,但又沒有完全回復2002年以前的模式。民研計劃因此仍在靜觀其變,會否再次改動調查方法則是言之尚早。 (初版:2006年11月21日新聞公報之附加資料)

A:We briefly introduced our survey on the popularity of Executive Councillors in our press release dated August 15, 2006, which is as follows:

  • The Executive Council is an important component of Hong Kong's constitutional system. It is hence well justified to monitor the popularity change of the Executive Council as a whole and its members on an individual basis. HKUPOP has started this polling series since the handover. 
  • From July 1997, HKUPOP conducted this survey every month by asking the question "Are you satisfied with the overall performance of the members of the HKSAR Executive Council?" Then from July 2000, the frequency of survey was changed to once every 2 months, and ended in May 2002. 
  • Once every 6 months from August 2002 to February 2005, HKUPOP adopted a more specific way of asking, and the question became "Do you think XXX, YYY, ZZZ…are doing a good or bad job as the non-official members of Executive Council?"
  • Meanwhile, once every 3 months between July 2003 and October 2005, HKUPOP also surveyed the popularity rating for each non-official Executive Councillor. The question used was "Please rate your support of XXX as non-official Executive Councillor using a 0-100 scale. 0 stands for absolutely no support, 100 stands for absolute support, 50 stands for half-half. How would you rate XXX?" This rating exercise targeted at all non-official members and sit-in members including the Head of Central Policy Unit and the Director of Chief Executive's Office, which summed up to a maximum of 22 persons in October 2005 right before the reorganization. As for the official Executive Councillors (i.e. Principal Officials under accountability system), their rating was conducted even more frequently, and that will be explained in subsequent releases. 
  • In October 2005, CE Donald Tsang increased the number of non-official members to 8. To cope with this change and reduce our workload, HKUPOP has started the rating survey on "Top 5 non-official members of Executive Council" since then in order to replace the previous rating survey of all individual Councillors. This "Top 5 Councillors" survey includes one naming and one rating stages, and its current cycle is to repeat once every 3 months. 

Thus this example has shown that HKUPOP would constantly review the pace of constitutional development, public concern and our research resources available, and make timely improvements on its survey method, frequency and way of release accordingly.
In other words, between July 1997 and May 2002, we did use the question of "Are you satisfied with the overall performance of the members of the HKSAR Executive Council?" in our tracking surveys. Our change in mid-2002 was mainly due to the introduction of the "Principal Officials Accountability System" by the previous Chief Executive of HKSAR Tung Chee-hwa at that time, whereby 14 Secretaries of Departments and Directors of Bureaux were appointed by him on contract terms to lead the government as well as to sit in the Executive Council. With such a significant change in the governance structure, we had to change our survey questions to match it. The present CE Donald Tsang reorganized the Executive Council in October last year, but it has not quite gone back to the pre-2002 model. POP is therefore adopting wait-and-see attitude, and it is too early to tell whether we will change our research design again. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 21 November 2006)

   


本網站內一切內容與香港大學立場無關。民意專欄內的文章及民意平台內的言論及法律責任由作者自負,其餘內容則由民意研究計劃總監鍾庭耀博士負責。網站所載資料,包括問卷提問方式及各份研究報告,除非特別註明,知識產權皆由香港大學民意研究計劃擁有後,透過本網站向外全面開放。各界人士使用有關資料時,敬請註明出處。

香港大學民意研究計劃版權所有。 本網站由[email protected] 製作。最後更新 :  30/12/2011