POP releases popularities of CE and SAR Government, people’s appraisal of policy areas of the government and Public Sentiment Index

 Press Release on April 21, 2020

POP releases popularities of CE and SAR Government,
people’s appraisal of policy areas of the government
and Public Sentiment Index

Special Announcements

  1. The predecessor of Hong Kong Public Opinion Program (HKPOP) was The Public Opinion Programme at The University of Hong Kong (HKUPOP). “POP” in this release can refer to HKPOP or its predecessor HKUPOP.
  2. The survey on people’s appraisal of five specific policy areas of the government released today by POP is the last of its kind before July 1, 2020. Whether it will be continued or not will depend on public support.

Abstract

POP successfully interviewed 1,005 Hong Kong residents by random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers in mid-April. Our survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 27.7 marks. Her net popularity is negative 54 percentage points. Both popularity figures have slightly improved since half a month ago, but the changes are within sampling errors. The latest net satisfaction of the HKSAR Government stands at negative 47 percentage points while the net trust value is negative 32 percentage points. Both figures have also improved slightly since last month. People’s net satisfaction rates with the current livelihood, economic and political conditions are negative 56, negative 61 and negative 74 percentage points respectively. These figures have not changed much compared to last month. The latest net satisfaction rates of all five specific policy areas of the HKSAR Government are negative. The net satisfaction rates of the government’s performance in maintaining economic prosperity, handling its relation with the Central Government, protecting human rights and freedom, improving people’s livelihood and its pace of democratic development are negative 35, negative 36, negative 39, negative 39 and negative 43 percentage points respectively. Compared with the historical lows registered in October 2019, the net satisfaction rates of all policy areas have recovered, but still far below the level registered in December 2018. As for the PSI, the latest figure is 56.6, down by 0.6 point from early April. The effective response rate of the survey is 64.5%. The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-4%, that of net values is +/-7% and that of ratings is +/-2.1 at 95% confidence level.

Contact Information

Date of survey : 14-17/4/2020
Survey method : Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers
Target population : Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above
Sample size[1] : 1,005 (including 505 landline and 500 mobile samples)
Effective response rate[2] : 64.5%
Sampling error[3] : Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, that of net values not more than +/-7% and that of ratings not more than +/-2.1 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 2018”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong – Key Statistics (2018 Edition)”.

[1]     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.

[2]     Before September 2017, “overall response rate” was used to report surveys’ contact information. Starting from September 2017, “effective response rate” was used. In July 2018, POP further revised the calculation of effective response rate. Thus, the response rates before and after the change cannot be directly compared.

[3]     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.

Popularity of CE and SAR Government

Recent popularity figures of CE Carrie Lam are summarized as follows:

Date of survey 3-6/2/20 17-19/2/20 27/2-3/3/20 17-20/3/20 30/3-2/4/20 14-17/4/20 Latest change
Sample size 1,001 1,008 1,015 1,004 1,005 1,005
Response rate 77.6% 64.6% 67.1% 62.9% 66.7% 64.5%
Latest findings Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding & error
Rating of CE Carrie Lam 20.3 18.2 22.6[4] 22.3 25.5[4] 27.7+/-2.1 +2.2
Vote of confidence in
CE Carrie Lam
13% 9%[4] 13%[4] 13% 16% 18+/-2% +2%
Vote of no confidence in
CE Carrie Lam
81% 83% 80% 77% 75% 72+/-3% -3%
Net approval rate -68% -74%[4] -66%[4] -64% -60% -54+/-5% +6%

[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.

Recent popularity figures of the HKSAR Government are summarized as follows:

Date of survey 15-21/11/19 13-18/12/19 16-21/1/20 17-19/2/20 17-20/3/20 14-17/4/20 Latest change
Sample size[5] 591 646 597 620 613 624
Response rate 74.1% 61.6% 69.7% 64.6% 62.9% 64.5%
Latest findings Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding & error
Satisfaction rate of SARG performance[6] 11% 14% 15% 9%[7] 17%[7] 21+/-3% +4%
Dissatisfaction rate of SARG performance[6] 77% 76% 75% 83%[7] 68%[7] 68+/-4% -1%
Net satisfaction rate -66% -62% -60% -74%[7] -51%[7] -47+/-7% +4%
Mean value[6] 1.7 1.8 1.8 1.6[7] 2.0[7] 2.0+/-0.1

[5]     Before March 2020, weighted count was used to report subsample size. Starting from March 2020, raw count was used instead.

[6]     Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.

[7]     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.

Recent figures regarding people’s trust in the HKSAR Government are summarized as follows:

Date of survey 15-21/11/19 13-18/12/19 16-21/1/20 17-19/2/20 17-20/3/20 14-17/4/20 Latest change
Sample size[8] 607 618 641 616 622 664
Response rate 74.1% 61.6% 69.7% 64.6% 62.9% 64.5%
Latest findings Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding & error
Trust in HKSAR Government[9] 23% 25% 19%[10] 14%[10] 25%[10] 29+/-4% +4%
Distrust in HKSAR Government[9] 64% 63% 69%[10] 76%[10] 62%[10] 60+/-4% -1%
Net trust -41% -39% -50%[10] -62%[10] -37%[10] -32+/-7% +5%
Mean value[9] 2.2 2.2 2.0[10] 1.8[10] 2.3[10] 2.3+/-0.1

[8]     Before March 2020, weighted count was used to report subsample size. Starting from March 2020, raw count was used instead.

[9]     Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.

[10]  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.

People’s recent appraisals of society’s conditions are summarized as follows:

Date of survey 15-21/11/19 13-18/12/19 16-21/1/20 17-19/2/20 17-20/3/20 14-17/4/20 Latest change
Sample size 1,008 1,046 866 1,008 1,004 1,005
Response rate 74.1% 61.6% 69.7% 64.6% 62.9% 64.5%
Latest findings Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding & error
Current livelihood condition:
Satisfaction rate[11]
17% 14% 17% 9%[12] 16%[12] 14+/-2% -1%
Current livelihood condition:
Dissatisfaction rate[11]
69% 68% 68% 79%[12] 67%[12] 70+/-3% +3%
Net satisfaction rate -52% -53% -52% -69%[12] -51%[12] -56+/-5% -4%
Mean value[11] 2.1[12] 2.1 2.1 1.8[12] 2.1[12] 2.0+/-0.1 -0.1
Current economic condition:
Satisfaction rate[11]
20% 17% 16% 9%[12] 12%[12] 11+/-2% -2%
Current economic condition:
Dissatisfaction rate[11]
57%[12] 57% 63%[12] 73%[12] 70% 72+/-3% +1%
Net satisfaction rate -37% -40% -47%[12] -64%[12] -58%[12] -61+/-4% -3%
Mean value[11] 2.3 2.4 2.2[12] 1.9[12] 2.1[12] 2.0+/-0.1 -0.1
Current political condition:
Satisfaction rate[11]
4% 3% 6%[12] 3%[12] 6%[12] 7+/-2% +1%
Current political condition:
Dissatisfaction rate[11]
83%[12] 88%[12] 85% 86% 80%[12] 81+/-2% +2%
Net satisfaction rate -79%[12] -84%[12] -79%[12] -83% -74%[12] -74+/-4% -1%
Mean value[11] 1.5[12] 1.4 1.5 1.4 1.6[12] 1.6+/-0.1

[11]  Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.

[12]  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.

Our latest survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 27.7 marks. Her approval rate is 18%, disapproval rate 72%, giving a net popularity of negative 54 percentage points. All popularity figures have slightly improved since half a month ago, but the changes have not gone beyond sampling errors.

Regarding the HKSAR Government, the latest satisfaction rate is 21%, whereas 68% were dissatisfied, thus net satisfaction stands at negative 47 percentage points. The mean score is 2.0, meaning close to “quite dissatisfied” in general. Regarding people’s trust in the HKSAR Government, 29% of the respondents expressed trust, 60% expressed distrust. The net trust value is negative 32 percentage points. The mean score is 2.3, meaning between “quite distrust” and “half-half” in general.  All of these figures have also improved slightly since last month but with changes within sampling errors.

As for people’s satisfaction with the current livelihood, economic and political conditions, the latest satisfaction rates are 14%, 11% and 7% respectively, while the net satisfaction rates are negative 56, negative 61 and negative 74 percentage points respectively. The mean scores of livelihood condition and economic condition are both 2.0, meaning close to “quite dissatisfied” in general; that of political condition is 1.6, meaning between “quite dissatisfied” and “very dissatisfied” in general. All of these figures have not changed much compared to last month.

People’s Appraisal of Policy Areas of the Government

Recent figures on people’s appraisal of the five specific policy areas of the HKSAR Government are summarized as follows, in descending order of net satisfaction rates:

Date of survey 18-19/12/17 14-21/6/18 17-20/12/18 24-28/10/19 14-17/4/20 Latest change
Sample size[13] 569-652 588-666 512-540 519 582-617
Response rate 64.9% 59.6% 60.6% 68.3% 64.5%
Latest findings Finding Finding Finding Finding Finding & error
Maintaining economic prosperity: Satisfaction rate[14] 44%[15] 46% 48% 14%[15] 24+/-3% +10%[15]
Maintaining economic prosperity: Dissatisfaction rate[14] 26%[15] 35%[15] 31% 68%[15] 59+/-4% -9%[15]
Net satisfaction rate 18%[15] 10%[15] 17% -54%[15] -35+/-7% +19%[15]
Mean value[14] 3.1 3.0 3.1 2.0[15] 2.4+/-0.1 +0.4[15]
Relation with the Central Government: Satisfaction rate[14] 52%[15] 52% 56% 17%[15] 23+/-3% +6%[15]
Relation with the Central Government: Dissatisfaction rate[14] 26%[15] 33%[15] 26%[15] 60%[15] 59+/-4% -1%
Net satisfaction rate 26%[15] 19% 31%[15] -43%[15] -36+/-7% +7%
Mean value[14] 3.3[15] 3.2 3.4[15] 2.1[15] 2.2+/-0.1 +0.1
Protecting human rights and freedom: Satisfaction rate[14] 36% 36% 35% 22%[15] 24+/-4% +2%
Protecting human rights and freedom: Dissatisfaction rate[14] 44% 49%[15] 46% 67%[15] 63+/-4% -4%
Net satisfaction rate -8% -13% -11% -45%[15] -39+/-7% +7%
Mean value[14] 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.0[15] 2.2+/-0.1 +0.2
Improving people’s livelihood: Satisfaction rate[14] 39%[15] 34%[15] 33% 15%[15] 23+/-3% +8%[15]
Improving people’s livelihood: Dissatisfaction rate[14] 38%[15] 47%[15] 46% 72%[15] 62+/-4% -10%[15]
Net satisfaction rate 1%[15] -13%[15] -13% -57%[15] -39+/-7% +18%[15]
Mean value[14] 2.9[15] 2.7[15] 2.7 1.9[15] 2.3+/-0.1 +0.3[15]
Pace of democratic development: Satisfaction rate[14] 30%[15] 29% 34% 15%[15] 21+/-3% +5%[15]
Pace of democratic development: Dissatisfaction rate[14] 49% 55%[15] 50% 70%[15] 64+/-4% -6%[15]
Net satisfaction rate -18%[15] -26%[15] -16% -55%[15] -43+/-7% +11%[15]
Mean value[14] 2.6 2.4[15] 2.6 1.9[15] 2.1+/-0.1 +0.2[15]

[13]  Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.

[14]  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.

The latest net satisfaction rates of all five specific policy areas of the HKSAR Government are negative. The net satisfaction rates of the government’s performance in maintaining economic prosperity, handling its relation with the Central Government, protecting human rights and freedom, improving people’s livelihood and its pace of democratic development are negative 35, negative 36, negative 39, negative 39 and negative 43 percentage points respectively. The mean values of these five specific policy areas range from 2.1 to 2.4, meaning between “quite dissatisfied” and “half-half” in general. Compared with the historical lows registered in October 2019, the net satisfaction rates of all policy areas have recovered, but are still far below the level registered in December 2018.

Public Sentiment Index

The Public Sentiment Index (PSI) compiled by POP aims at quantifying Hong Kong people’s sentiments, in order to explain and predict the likelihood of collective behaviour. PSI comprises 2 components: one being Government Appraisal (GA) Score and the other being Society Appraisal (SA) Score. GA refers to people’s appraisal of society’s governance while SA refers to people’s appraisal of the social environment. Both GA and SA scores are compiled from a respective of 4 and 6 opinion survey figures. All PSI, GA and SA scores range between 0 to 200, with 100 meaning normal.

The chart of PSI, GA and SA are shown below:

Latest figure Public Sentiment Index
(PSI): 56.6 (-0.6)
Government Appraisal
(GA): 62.8 (+2.6)
Society Appraisal
(SA): 52.2 (-3.6)

Recent values of PSI, GA, SA and 10 fundamental figures are tabulated as follows:

Cut-off date 6/2/20 19/2/20 3/3/20 20/3/20 2/4/20 17/4/20 Latest change
Public Sentiment Index (PSI) 51.9 38.5 40.1 56.0 57.1 56.6 -0.6
Government Appraisal (GA) 50.6 42.1 45.1 58.2 60.2 62.8 +2.6
Rating of CE 20.3 18.2 22.6 22.3 25.5 27.7 +2.2
Net approval rate of CE -68% -74% -66% -64% -60% -54% +6%
Mean value of people’s satisfaction with SARG 1.8[16] 1.6 1.6[16] 2.0 2.0[16] 2.0
Mean value of people’s trust in SARG 2.0[16] 1.8 1.8[16] 2.3 2.3[16] 2.3
Society Appraisal (SA) 56.1[16] 40.5 40.5[16] 55.9 55.9[16] 52.2 -3.6
People’s satisfaction with political condition 1.5[16] 1.4 1.4[16] 1.6 1.6[16] 1.6
Weighting index of political condition 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16]
People’s satisfaction with economic condition 2.2[16] 1.9 1.9[16] 2.1 2.1[16] 2.0 -0.1
Weighting index of economic condition 0.32[16] 0.32[16] 0.32[16] 0.32[16] 0.32[16] 0.32[16]
People’s satisfaction with livelihood condition 2.1[16] 1.8 1.8[16] 2.1 2.1[16] 2.0 -0.1
Weighting index of livelihood condition 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16] 0.34[16]

[15]  POP will adopt the latest published figures when there are no respective updates.

As for the meaning of the score values, please refer to the following:

Score value Percentile Score value Percentile
140-200 Highest 1% 0-60 Lowest 1%
125 Highest 5% 75 Lowest 5%
120 Highest 10% 80 Lowest 10%
110 Highest 25% 90 Lowest 25%
100 being normal level, meaning half above half below

The latest PSI stands at 56.6, down by 0.6 point from early April. It can be considered as among the worst 1% across the past 20 years or so. Among the two component scores of PSI, the Government Appraisal (GA) Score that reflects people’s appraisal of society’s governance increases by 2.6 points to 62.8, whereas the Society Appraisal (SA) Score that reflects people’s appraisal of the social environment decreases by 3.6 points to 52.2. They can both be considered as among the worst 1% across the past 20 years or so.

Opinion Daily

In 2007, POP started collaborating with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP a record of significant events of that day according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would then become “Opinion Daily” after they are verified by POP.

For some of the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey was conducted from 24 to 28 October, 2019 while this survey was conducted from 14 to 17 April, 2020. 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.

15/4/20 Director of the Liaison Office Luo Huining says Hong Kong needs to safeguard national security.
14/4/20 Carrie Lam claims the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office and the Liaison Office did not interfere in Hong Kong affairs.
13/4/20 The Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office and the Liaison Office criticize Legislative Councillor Dennis Kwok.
12/4/20 The number of daily new confirmed cases of coronavirus disease in Hong Kong drop to four.
10/4/20 Large crowds are seen in various places during Easter holiday in Hong Kong.
9/4/20 The government launches a subsidy scheme involving $80 billion to keep workers in employment.
8/4/20 The government announces relief measures involving over $130 billion to combat the pandemic.
1/4/20 HSBC announces a suspension of dividends.
1/4/20 The government orders karaoke lounges, mahjong parlors and nightclubs to close.
30/3/20 Isolation wards in public hospitals are fully occupied and overloaded.
29/3/20 The enforcement on “Prohibition on Group Gathering” is judged to have grey areas.
27/3/20 The government announces the ban on gathering with more than 4 people.
24/3/20 36 people breach 14-day home quarantine orders.
23/3/20 The government bans bars and restaurants from selling alcohol.
23/3/20 The government announces ban on non-residents arrivals at the airport from entering Hong Kong.
20/3/20 Hong Kong confirms 48 coronavirus disease cases in one day.
17/3/20 The government announces people entering Hong Kong from any foreign country will be put in a 14-day quarantine.
16/3/20 The US Federal Reserve cuts interest rate by one percent.
16/3/20 Multiple imported coronavirus disease cases are found in Hong Kong.
15/3/20 The government announces people entering Hong Kong from the UK and the US will be put in a 14-day quarantine.
9/3/20 Global stock markets crash.
8/3/20 Police arrests during midnight 17 people who are suspected of making explosives.
4/3/20 The first batch of government-chartered flights bring back Hong Kong people in Hubei.
28/2/20 Police arrests Jimmy Lai, Lee Cheuk-yan and Yeung Sum.
26/2/20 Financial Secretary Paul Chan delivers the Budget.
19/2/20 The first batch of Hong Kong people on the cruise Diamond Princess return to Hong Kong by a charter flight.
14/2/20 The government announces the setting up of the Anti-epidemic Fund.
13/2/20 Xia Baolong is appointed the Director of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office.
9/2/20 First case of Wuhan pneumonia infection within family is reported in Hong Kong.
7/2/20 The policy of putting people entering Hong Kong from mainland China in a 14-day quarantine takes effect.
6/2/20 People rush to purchase daily necessities.
4/2/20 First death from Wuhan pneumonia is reported in Hong Kong.
3/2/20 The government announces further closure of borders.
1/2/20 Hospital Authority Employees Alliance members vote to go on strike.
31/1/20 The government refuses full border closure.
29/1/20 People rush to purchase masks, which are in short supply.
28/1/20 The government announces partial border closure.
27/1/20 The government imposes immigration restrictions on Hubei residents and people who visited Hubei.
23/1/20 A lockdown of Wuhan is announced.
22/1/20 Two “highly suspected” Wuhan pneumonia cases are found in Hong Kong.
20/1/20 Wuhan pneumonia spreads rapidly in China.
19/1/20 Rally at Central turns into a conflict between protestors and the police.
9/1/20 Experts say Wuhan pneumonia is caused by a new coronavirus.
7/1/20 The government adds Wuhan pneumonia to the list of notifiable diseases.
4/1/20 Luo Huining is appointed the Director of the Liaison Office.
2/1/20 A woman back from Wuhan has symptoms of pneumonia.
1/1/20 The Civil Human Rights Front organizes the New Year Rally.
31/12/19 Protesting activities occur in multiple districts on New Year’s Eve.
28/12/19 Number of tours for tourists from mainland China has plunged.
25/12/19 Protesting activities occur in multiple districts during Christmas.
16/12/19 Carrie Lam pays a duty visit to Beijing.
11/12/19 All members of the Independent Police Complaints Council International Expert Panel quit.
9/12/19 Survey suggests that a wave of lay-offs and company closures in the retail sector is coming.
8/12/19 The Civil Human Rights Front announces that around eight hundred thousand people participated in the International Human Rights Day protest.
4/12/19 The government announces a new round of relief measures.
28/11/19 US President Donald Trump signs the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act.
25/11/19 The pro-democracy camp wins a majority of seats in the District Councils.
19/11/19 The anti-mask law is ruled to be unconstitutional.
17/11/19 The police surround the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and clash violently with protesters.
12/11/19 Violent conflicts between protestors and the police occur in the Chinese University of Hong Kong.
11/11/19 A traffic policeman fires three live rounds at a protester.
10/11/19 Protests and conflicts between protestors and the police occur in multiple districts in Hong Kong.
8/11/19 HKUST student who fell from height in Tseung Kwan O passes away.
6/11/19 Vice Premier of the State Council Han Zheng meets with Carrie Lam.
6/11/19 Junius Ho is attacked with a knife.
29/10/19 Nomination of Joshua Wong for District Council election is ruled to be invalid.
28/10/19 Journalists protest against police violence targeting journalists during police press conference.

Data Analysis

Our survey shows that the popularity rating of CE Carrie Lam now stands at 27.7 marks. Her net popularity is negative 54 percentage points. Both popularity figures have slightly improved since half a month ago, but the changes are within sampling errors. The latest net satisfaction of the HKSAR Government stands at negative 47 percentage points while the net trust value is negative 32 percentage points. Both figures have also improved slightly since last month. People’s net satisfaction rates with the current livelihood, economic and political conditions are negative 56, negative 61 and negative 74 percentage points respectively. These figures have not changed much compared to last month.

The latest net satisfaction rates of all five specific policy areas of the HKSAR Government are negative. The net satisfaction rates of the government’s performance in maintaining economic prosperity, handling its relation with the Central Government, protecting human rights and freedom, improving people’s livelihood and its pace of democratic development are negative 35, negative 36, negative 39, negative 39 and negative 43 percentage points respectively. Compared with the historical lows registered in October 2019, the net satisfaction rates of all policy areas have recovered, but still far below the level registered in December 2018.

As for the PSI, the latest figure is 56.6, down by 0.6 point from early April.

Click to access the login or register cheese