2022年6月21日香港民意研究所發佈會 – 傳媒參考資料
發佈會直播
講者:
袁彌昌 - 時事評論員
黃志偉 - 香港伍倫貢學院社會科學院講師
特別宣佈
香港民意研究所（香港民研）前身為香港大學民意研究計劃（港大民研）。公報內的「香港民研」指的可以是香港民意研究所或其前身港大民研。
香港民研每半年檢視和調整工作一次，部份改變已在五月四日（即民研三周年）之後啟動，包括下調新聞發佈會的次數和啟動網上公民教育工作。六月初，我們正式啟動「一國兩制25周年中期民情總結」，暫時以兩個月為第一階段，逐個星期以不同形式發佈各個項目總結。首先以官員民望打頭陣，上星期再總結六四民情，今個星期是身份認同，然後是回歸周年及社會現況評價總結，詳情容後公佈。另外，七月開始，我們打算下調定期民意調查的次數，由每月兩次減至每月一次，以便爭取資源進行公民教育和民情總結。同時，民研亦希望教育大眾，數字歸數字，評論歸評論。所有由民調數字引發的個人評論，責任由論者自負，與民研無關。
公報簡要
香港民研於五月底至六月初由真實訪問員以隨機抽樣電話訪問方式成功訪問了1,000名香港居民。調查顯示，以沒有涉及身分對立問題的獨立評分計，無論是按認同感、重要性或認同指數排名，「香港人」身分均繼續排行第一位，之後是「亞洲人」、「中華民族一分子」、「世界公民」、「中國人」和「中華人民共和國國民」。對比半年前，「中華民族一分子」的認同感和認同指數，「中國人」及「中華人民共和國國民」的重要性和認同指數均顯著上升。同時，「中華民族一分子」及「中國人」的三項指標均創2018年12月以來新高，而「中華人民共和國國民」的所有指標則創2016年12月以來新高。相對之下，「香港人」的三項指標再創2017年6月以來新低，「世界公民」的認同指數則創2008年12月有紀錄以來新低。如果把「香港人」和「中國人」身分對立比較，讓市民在「香港人」、「中國人」、「香港的中國人」和「中國的香港人」四者中選擇自己最認同的身分，無論是狹義或廣義地自稱為「香港人」的比率，都比同樣定義的「中國人」比率為高。調查的實效回應比率為39.8%。在95%置信水平下，調查的百分比誤差不超過+/-4%，評分誤差不超過+/-3.0。
樣本資料
| 調查日期 | ： | 31/5-5/6/2021 |
| 調查方法 | ： | 由真實訪問員進行隨機抽樣電話訪問 |
| 訪問對象 | ： | 18歲或以上操粵語的香港居民 |
| 成功樣本數目[1] | ： | 1,000 (包括500個固網及500個手機樣本) |
| 實效回應比率 | ： | 39.8% |
| 抽樣誤差[2] | ： | 在95%置信水平下，百分比誤差不超過+/-4%，評分誤差不超過+/-3.0 |
| 加權方法 | ： | 按照政府統計處提供的統計數字以「反覆多重加權法」作出調整。全港人口年齡及性別分佈統計數字來自《二零二一年年中人口數字》，而教育程度（最高就讀程度）及經濟活動身分統計數字則來自《香港的女性及男性 - 主要統計數字》（2021年版）。 |
- 數字為調查的總樣本數目，個別題目則可能只涉及次樣本。有關數字請參閱下列數表內列出的樣本數目。
- 此公報中所有誤差數字均以95%置信水平計算。95%置信水平，是指倘若以不同隨機樣本重複進行有關調查100次，則95次各自計算出的誤差範圍會包含人口真實數字。由於調查數字涉及抽樣誤差，傳媒引用百分比數字時，應避免使用小數點，在引用評分數字時，則可以使用一個小數點。
最新數據
關於香港市民各項身分的獨立評分數字表列如下：
| 調查日期 | 1-4/6/20 | 7-10/12/20 | 7-10/6/21 | 29/11-3/12/21 | 31/5-5/6/22 | 最新變化 | |
| 樣本數目 | 575-690 | 529-648 | 586-703 | 576-708 | 567-700 | -- | |
| 回應比率 | 64.3% | 70.0% | 55.1% | 44.9% | 39.8% | -- | |
| 最新結果[3] | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- | |
| 香港人 | 認同感 | 8.57 | 8.26[4] | 7.78[4] | 7.94 | 7.77+/-0.18 | -0.17 |
| 重要性 | 8.34 | 7.89[4] | 7.80 | 7.64 | 7.64+/-0.19 | -- | |
| 認同指數 | 83.1 | 79.5[4] | 76.3[4] | 75.9 | 75.4+/-1.7 | -0.6 | |
| 亞洲人 | 認同感 | 7.83 | 7.84 | 7.74 | 7.79 | 7.74+/-0.21 | -0.05 |
| 重要性 | 6.89 | 6.65 | 6.56 | 6.62 | 6.57+/-0.23 | -0.05 | |
| 認同指數 | 72.3 | 70.1 | 69.1 | 69.8 | 69.3+/-2.1 | -0.5 | |
| 中華民族 一分子 |
認同感 | 6.25 | 6.44 | 6.46 | 6.38 | 6.79+/-0.29 | +0.41[4] |
| 重要性 | 5.89 | 6.04 | 6.01 | 6.06 | 6.42+/-0.30 | +0.37 | |
| 認同指數 | 59.2 | 60.7 | 61.0 | 60.7 | 65.0+/-2.9 | +4.3[4] | |
| 世界公民 | 認同感 | 6.93 | 6.97 | 6.79 | 6.86 | 6.62+/-0.23 | -0.24 |
| 重要性 | 6.64 | 6.53 | 6.45 | 6.45 | 6.30+/-0.23 | -0.15 | |
| 認同指數 | 66.6 | 66.5 | 64.8 | 65.0 | 63.3+/-2.0 | -1.7 | |
| 中國人 | 認同感 | 5.74 | 5.93 | 6.02 | 6.13 | 6.52+/-0.29 | +0.38 |
| 重要性 | 5.50 | 5.40 | 5.59 | 5.61 | 6.18+/-0.31 | +0.57[4] | |
| 認同指數 | 54.6 | 54.9 | 56.0 | 56.8 | 61.5+/-3.0 | +4.7[4] | |
| 中華人民 共和國國民 |
認同感 | 4.90 | 5.16 | 5.30 | 5.71 | 6.14+/-0.31 | +0.43 |
| 重要性 | 4.77 | 4.99 | 5.08 | 5.32 | 5.95+/-0.30 | +0.63[4] | |
| 認同指數 | 46.8 | 49.3 | 50.5 | 53.6 | 59.1+/-3.0 | +5.5[4] | |
- 「認同指數」計算自個別樣本之認同感評分和重要性評分的幾何平均數再乘以10。若個別樣本欠缺認同感或重要性評分之數據，則由整體認同感平均分或重要性平均分所取代。
- 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
沒有涉及身分對立問題的獨立評分結果顯示，無論是按認同感、重要性或認同指數排名，「香港人」身分均繼續排行第一位，之後是「亞洲人」、「中華民族一分子」、「世界公民」、「中國人」和「中華人民共和國國民」。認同感評分分別為7.77、7.74、6.79、6.62、6.52及6.14。重要性評分則分別為7.64、6.57、6.42、6.30、6.18及5.95。把個別樣本之認同感評分和重要性評分的幾何平均數乘以10，就得出0至100分的「認同指數」，0分代表絕不投入，100分代表絕對投入，最新數字分別為75.4、69.3、65.0、63.3、61.5及59.1。對比半年前，「中華民族一分子」的認同感和認同指數，「中國人」的重要性和認同指數以及「中華人民共和國國民」的重要性和認同指數均顯著上升。同時，「中華民族一分子」及「中國人」的三項指標均創2018年12月以來新高，而「中華人民共和國國民」的所有指標則創2016年12月以來新高。相對之下，「香港人」的三項指標再創2017年6月以來新低，「世界公民」的認同指數則創2008年12月有紀錄以來新低。
至於採自行之已久的「香港人」與「中國人」身分對立提問方式的調查結果，則表列如下：
| 調查日期 | 1-4/6/20 | 7-10/12/20 | 7-10/6/21 | 29/11-3/12/21 | 31/5-5/6/22 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 602 | 639 | 605 | 609 | 627 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 64.3% | 70.0% | 55.1% | 44.9% | 39.8% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 自稱為「香港人」之比率 | 50% | 44%[5] | 44% | 39% | 39+/-4% | -- |
| 自稱為「中國人」之比率 | 13% | 15% | 13% | 18%[5] | 18+/-3% | -- |
| 自稱為「香港的中國人」之比率 | 11% | 14% | 13% | 11% | 11+/-3% | -- |
| 自稱為「中國的香港人」之比率 | 25% | 25% | 28% | 31% | 31+/-4% | -- |
| 自認為廣義「香港人」之比率 | 75% | 69%[5] | 72% | 70% | 70+/-4% | -- |
| 自認為廣義「中國人」之比率 | 24% | 29%[5] | 26% | 28% | 29+/-4% | -- |
| 自稱「香港人」和「中國人」 混合身分之比率 |
36% | 38% | 42% | 42% | 42+/-4% | -- |
- 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
如果把「香港人」和「中國人」身分對立比較，讓市民在「香港人」、「中國人」、「香港的中國人」和「中國的香港人」四者中選擇自己最認同的身分，有39%稱自己為「香港人」，18%自稱為「中國人」，11%自稱為「香港的中國人」，而31%則自稱為「中國的香港人」。換言之，70%認為自己是廣義的「香港人」(即回答「香港人」或「中國的香港人」)，29%認為自己是廣義的「中國人」(即回答「中國人」或「香港的中國人」)，42%則選擇了「香港人」和「中國人」的混合身分 (即回答「香港的中國人」或「中國的香港人」)。無論是狹義或廣義地自稱為「香港人」的比率，都比同樣定義的「中國人」比率為高。與半年前比較，以上數字沒有明顯變化。
民意日誌
香港民研於2007年開始與慧科訊業有限公司合作，由慧科訊業按照香港民研設計的分析方法，將每日大事記錄傳送至香港民研，經香港民研核實後成為「民意日誌」。
由於本新聞公報所涉及的調查項目，上次調查日期為29/11-3/12/2021，而今次調查日期則為30/5-5/6/2022，因此是次公報中的「民意日誌」項目便以上述日期為依歸，讓讀者作出比較。以涵蓋率不下25%本地報章每日頭條新聞和報社評論計，在上述期間發生的相關大事包括以下事件，讀者可以自行判斷有關事件有否影響各項民調數字：
| 28/5/22 | 香港國安法法律論壇在港舉行 |
| 27/5/22 | 美國國務卿發表對華政策演講 |
| 25/5/22 | 國務院召開全國經濟會議 |
| 8/5/22 | 李家超高票當選第六任香港行政長官 |
| 18/4/22 | 中國首季國內GDP按年增長4.8% |
| 16/4/22 | 神舟十三號航天員成功返回地球 |
| 30/3/22 | 林鄭月娥承認防疫措施致使人才流失，承諾捍衛香港的國際地位 |
| 14/3/22 | 首批內地醫療支援隊抵港 |
| 11/3/22 | 全國兩會閉幕，國務院總理李克強出席記者會 |
| 18/2/22 | 中聯辦成立香港社會同心抗疫行動商會 |
| 17/2/22 | 首批支援香港的中國內地抗疫專家團抵港 |
| 12/2/22 | 新冠肺炎疫情惡化，單日新增1,514宗新冠肺炎個案創新高 |
| 11/2/22 | 新冠肺炎疫情惡化，李家超率團赴深圳商討抗疫 |
| 10/2/22 | 新冠肺炎疫情嚴峻，中央政府表示將全力支援香港抗疫 |
| 8/2/22 | 政府收緊防疫措施，限制跨家庭聚會及推行疫苗護照 |
| 22/1/22 | 葵涌邨疫情出現幾何式爆發，政府公佈多項抗疫措施 |
| 18/1/22 | 政府因有倉鼠感染新冠肺炎而人道毀滅2,000隻動物 |
| 17/1/22 | 國家統計局公佈中國2021年GDP按年增長8.1% |
| 29/12/21 | 7名立場新聞高層被捕，立場新聞隨即停運 |
| 6/12/21 | 夏寶龍指「愛國者治港」是搞「五光十色」 |
| 3/12/21 | 東京奧運中國代表團到訪香港 |
下次新聞公報／發佈會 (暫定)
- [發佈會] 6月24日（星期五）下午二時三十分
我們香港人：自願醫保
客席評論：鍾劍華 鄒崇銘 - [新聞公報] 6月28日（星期二）下午二時三十分
特區周年調查總結、政府民望、民情指數及五項核心社會指標 - [發佈會] 7月5日（星期二）下午二時三十分
社會現況評價總結
June 21, 2022
Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute Press Conference – Press Materials
Press Conference Live
Speakers:
Derek Yuen - Current Affairs Commentator
Paul Chi-Wai Wong - Lecturer, Faculty of Social Sciences, UOW College, HK
Special Announcements
The predecessor of Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute (PORI) was The Public Opinion Programme at The University of Hong Kong (HKUPOP). “PORI” in this release can refer to Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute or its predecessor HKUPOP.
PORI reviews and adjusts its work once every six months. Some changes have already been started after May 4 (i.e., PORI’s 3rd Anniversary), including reducing the frequency of press conferences and developing online civic education. In early June, we have officially kickstarted the “One Country Two Systems 25-year Mid-term Review”. The first phase of the review will take two months, in different forms of releases each week. We kickstarted with the popularity of officials, then June Fourth wrap-up last week, followed by this week’s ethnic identity, then handover anniversaries and society’s current condition, more details to be announced. Meanwhile, starting from July, we plan to reduce the frequency of our tracking surveys from twice a month to once a month, in order to conserve resources for civic education and mid-term review. Meanwhile, PORI would also like to stress the separation of comments from figures, so that the responsibility of all personal comments arising from our scientific research lies entirely on the commentators concerned, not PORI.
Abstract
PORI successfully interviewed 1,000 Hong Kong residents by a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers from late May to early June. Our survey using independent rating questions that do not involve choosing one among identities show that whether in terms of strength rating, importance rating or identity index, the identity of “Hongkongers” continues to rank first, followed by “Asians”, “members of the Chinese race”, “global citizens”, “Chinese” and “citizens of the PRC”. Compared with half a year ago, the strength rating and identity index of “members of the Chinese race” as well as the importance ratings and identity indices of “Chinese” and “citizens of the PRC” have all increased significantly. Meanwhile, all three indicators of “members of the Chinese race” and “Chinese” have registered new highs since December 2018, while all those of “citizens of the PRC” have also reached new record highs since December 2016. On the other hand, the three indicators of “Hongkongers” have registered record lows since June 2017 again, while the identity index of “global citizens” has registered an all-time record low since December 2008. If we use a dichotomy of “Hongkonger” versus “Chinese” identity and ask people to make a choice among four identities, namely, “Hongkongers”, “Chinese”, “Chinese in Hong Kong” and “Hongkongers in China”, whether in their narrow and broad senses, the proportions of people identifying themselves as “Hongkongers” outnumber those of “Chinese”. The effective response rate of the survey is 39.8%. The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-4% and that of ratings is +/-3.0 at 95% confidence level.
Contact Information
| Date of survey | : | 31/5-5/6/2021 |
| Survey method | : | Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers |
| Target population | : | Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above |
| Sample size[1] | : | 1,000 (including 500 landline and 500 mobile samples) |
| Effective response rate | : | 39.8% |
| Sampling error[2] | : | Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% and that of ratings not more than +/-3.0 at 95% conf. level |
| Weighting method | : | Rim-weighted according to figures provided by the Census and Statistics Department. The gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population came from “Mid-year population for 2021”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong - Key Statistics (2021 Edition)”. |
- 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.
- 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
Latest figures on Hong Kong people’s ratings on different identities are tabulated as follows:
| Date of survey | 1-4/6/20 | 7-10/12/20 | 7-10/6/21 | 29/11-3/12/21 | 31/5-5/6/22 | Latest change | |
| Sample size | 575-690 | 529-648 | 586-703 | 576-708 | 567-700 | -- | |
| Response rate | 64.3% | 70.0% | 55.1% | 44.9% | 39.8% | -- | |
| Latest findings[3] | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- | |
| Hongkongers | Strength rating | 8.57 | 8.26[4] | 7.78[4] | 7.94 | 7.77+/-0.18 | -0.17 |
| Importance rating | 8.34 | 7.89[4] | 7.80 | 7.64 | 7.64+/-0.19 | -- | |
| Identity index | 83.1 | 79.5[4] | 76.3[4] | 75.9 | 75.4+/-1.7 | -0.6 | |
| Asians | Strength rating | 7.83 | 7.84 | 7.74 | 7.79 | 7.74+/-0.21 | -0.05 |
| Importance rating | 6.89 | 6.65 | 6.56 | 6.62 | 6.57+/-0.23 | -0.05 | |
| Identity index | 72.3 | 70.1 | 69.1 | 69.8 | 69.3+/-2.1 | -0.5 | |
| Members of the Chinese race | Strength rating | 6.25 | 6.44 | 6.46 | 6.38 | 6.79+/-0.29 | +0.41[4] |
| Importance rating | 5.89 | 6.04 | 6.01 | 6.06 | 6.42+/-0.30 | +0.37 | |
| Identity index | 59.2 | 60.7 | 61.0 | 60.7 | 65.0+/-2.9 | +4.3[4] | |
| Global citizens | Strength rating | 6.93 | 6.97 | 6.79 | 6.86 | 6.62+/-0.23 | -0.24 |
| Importance rating | 6.64 | 6.53 | 6.45 | 6.45 | 6.30+/-0.23 | -0.15 | |
| Identity index | 66.6 | 66.5 | 64.8 | 65.0 | 63.3+/-2.0 | -1.7 | |
| Chinese | Strength rating | 5.74 | 5.93 | 6.02 | 6.13 | 6.52+/-0.29 | +0.38 |
| Importance rating | 5.50 | 5.40 | 5.59 | 5.61 | 6.18+/-0.31 | +0.57[4] | |
| Identity index | 54.6 | 54.9 | 56.0 | 56.8 | 61.5+/-3.0 | +4.7[4] | |
| Citizens of the PRC |
Strength rating | 4.90 | 5.16 | 5.30 | 5.71 | 6.14+/-0.31 | +0.43 |
| Importance rating | 4.77 | 4.99 | 5.08 | 5.32 | 5.95+/-0.30 | +0.63[4] | |
| Identity index | 46.8 | 49.3 | 50.5 | 53.6 | 59.1+/-3.0 | +5.5[4] | |
- “Identity index” is calculated for each respondent by taking the geometric mean of the strength and importance ratings and then multiplied by 10. If either the strength or importance rating of a respondent is missing, it is substituted by the sample mean.
- 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.
Results of independent rating questions that do not involve choosing one among identities show that whether in terms of strength rating, importance rating or identity index, the identity of “Hongkongers” continues to rank first, followed by “Asians”, “members of the Chinese race”, “global citizens”, “Chinese” and “citizens of the PRC”. The strength ratings are 7.77, 7.74, 6.79, 6.62, 6.52 and 6.14 respectively, while the importance ratings are 7.64, 6.57, 6.42, 6.30, 6.18 and 5.95 respectively. Taking the geometric mean of the strength and importance ratings of each respondent and then multiply it by 10, we have an “identity index” between 0 and 100, with 0 meaning no feeling and 100 meaning extremely strong feeling. The latest figures are 75.4, 69.3, 65.0, 63.3, 61.5 and 59.1 respectively. Compared with half a year ago, the strength rating and identity index of “members of the Chinese race” as well as the importance ratings and identity indices of “Chinese” and “citizens of the PRC” have all increased significantly. Meanwhile, all three indicators of “members of the Chinese race” and “Chinese” have registered new highs since December 2018, while all those of “citizens of the PRC” have also reached new record highs since December 2016. On the other hand, the three indicators of “Hongkongers” have registered record lows since June 2017 again, while the identity index of “global citizens” has registered an all-time record low since December 2008.
As for the results from the survey mode used for long on Hong Kong people’s sense of ethnic identity, latest figures are tabulated as follows:
| Date of survey | 1-4/6/20 | 7-10/12/20 | 7-10/6/21 | 29/11-3/12/21 | 31/5-5/6/22 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 602 | 639 | 605 | 609 | 627 | -- |
| Response rate | 64.3% | 70.0% | 55.1% | 44.9% | 39.8% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Identified as “Hongkongers” | 50% | 44%[5] | 44% | 39% | 39+/-4% | -- |
| Identified as “Chinese” | 13% | 15% | 13% | 18%[5] | 18+/-3% | -- |
| Identified as “Chinese in Hong Kong” | 11% | 14% | 13% | 11% | 11+/-3% | -- |
| Identified as “Hongkongers in China” | 25% | 25% | 28% | 31% | 31+/-4% | -- |
| Identified as “Hongkongers” in broad sense |
75% | 69%[5] | 72% | 70% | 70+/-4% | -- |
| Identified as “Chinese” in broad sense |
24% | 29%[5] | 26% | 28% | 29+/-4% | -- |
| Identified with a mixed identity of “Hongkongers” and “Chinese” | 36% | 38% | 42% | 42% | 42+/-4% | -- |
- 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.
If we use a dichotomy of “Hongkonger” versus “Chinese” identity and ask people to make a choice among four identities, namely, “Hongkongers”, “Chinese”, “Chinese in Hong Kong” and “Hongkongers in China”, 39% identified themselves as “Hongkongers”, 18% as “Chinese”, 11% as “Chinese in Hong Kong” and 31% as “Hongkongers in China”. In other words, 70% identified themselves as “Hongkongers” in a broad sense (i.e., either as “Hongkongers” or “Hongkongers in China”), 29% identified themselves as “Chinese” in a broad sense (i.e., either as “Chinese” or “Chinese in Hong Kong”), while 42% chose a mixed identity of “Hongkongers” and “Chinese” (i.e., either as “Chinese in Hong Kong” or “Hongkongers in China”). Whether in their narrow and broad senses, the proportions of people identifying themselves as “Hongkongers” outnumber those of “Chinese”. Compared with half a year ago, all the above figures have not changed much.
Opinion Daily
In 2007, PORI started collaborating with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to PORI a record of significant events of that day according to the research method designed by PORI. These daily entries would then become “Opinion Daily” after they are verified by PORI.
For the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey was conducted from 29 November to 3 December, 2021 while this survey was conducted from 30 May to 5 June, 2022. During this period, herewith the significant events selected from counting newspaper headlines and commentaries on a daily basis and covered by at least 25% of the local newspaper articles. Readers can make their own judgment if these significant events have any impacts to different polling figures.
| 28/5/22 | The National Security Law Legal Forum is held in Hong Kong. |
| 27/5/22 | US Secretary of State delivers a speech on policy toward China. |
| 25/5/22 | The State Council holds a national conference on stabilising the economy. |
| 8/5/22 | John Lee is elected as the sixth Chief Executive of Hong Kong with overwhelming votes. |
| 18/4/22 | China’s GDP grows 4.8% year on year in the first quarter of 2022. |
| 16/4/22 | Astronauts of Shenzhou 13 safely return to the Earth. |
| 30/3/22 | Carrie Lam concedes anti-pandemic measures contributed to brain drain, but vows to defend Hong Kong’s international status. |
| 14/3/22 | The first batch of Mainland medical support team arrives in Hong Kong. |
| 11/3/22 | Li Keqiang attends press conference after conclusion of NPC and CPPCC sessions. |
| 18/2/22 | The Liaison Office holds a conference on jointly combatting the COVID-19 pandemic. |
| 17/2/22 | First group of pandemic experts supporting Hong Kong from mainland China arrives. |
| 12/2/22 | As COVID-19 outbreak continues to grow, Hong Kong reports 1,514 cases, registering a record high. |
| 11/2/22 | As COVID-19 outbreak continues to grow, a delegation led by John Lee attends the second Mainland-Hong Kong thematic meeting on COVID-19 pandemic in Shenzhen. |
| 10/2/22 | As COVID-19 outbreak continues to grow, the Central Government voices full support to Hong Kong in combatting the pandemic. |
| 8/2/22 | The government tightens the anti-epidemic measures, limiting multi-household gatherings and launching vaccine pass. |
| 22/1/22 | The government announces new anti-epidemic measures after Kwai Chung Estate reported “geometric growth” in COVID-19 cases. |
| 18/1/22 | The government culls 2,000 animals after a hamster contracts COVID-19. |
| 17/1/22 | National Bureau of Statistics announces that China’s GDP grows 8.1% in 2021. |
| 29/12/21 | Stand News closes after seven senior staff members are arrested. |
| 6/12/21 | Xia Baolong says the “patriots administering Hong Kong” principle aims at achieving participation of people from diverse backgrounds. |
| 3/12/21 | The Tokyo Olympics Chinese delegation arrives in Hong Kong. |
Upcoming Press Releases / Press Conferences (Tentative)
- [Press Conference] June 24 (Friday) at 14:30
We Hongkongers: Voluntary Health Insurance
Guest commentators: Kim-wah Chung & Sung-ming Chow - [Press Release] June 28 (Tuesday) at 14:30
Wrap up on HKSAR anniversary survey, popularity figures of the government, Public Sentiment Index and five core social indicators - [Press Conference] July 5 (Tuesday) at 14:30
Wrap up on society’s current condition
