Overview
Background and purpose
The purpose of the 2024 Survey of Public Office Holders was to gather new baseline measures, track progress over time,[1] learn what is working well, and continue to gather general insights into how the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner (Office) can improve the way in which it communicates and engages with public office holders who are subject to the Conflict of Interest Act (Act).
Research objectives
To obtain updated measures of:
Knowledge of the Office's mandate/purpose
Interaction frequency with the Office
Perceived value of the Office
Perceived level of the Office's trustworthiness
Perceived level of the Office's credibility
Perceived level of the Office's timeliness/proactivity
Satisfaction with most recent Office interaction
To obtain the latest feedback regarding:
Preferred Office communication vehicles/channels
General interest in receiving information from the Office
Preferred frequency of Office communication
Perceived level of satisfaction with training
Interest in Office training opportunities
Preferred Office training format
Preferred Office training frequency
Ways in which the Office can improve to better serve its key audiences
This survey research was designed to align with the Office's 2021-2024 Strategic Plan, specifically,
the Communications & Engagement focus area. The goal for this focus area is to increase trust in, and credibility of the Office with key audiences so that they become stronger allies in the delivery of the mandate of the Office and can effectively manage conflict of interest issues.
Methodology
The survey was developed, tested, and deployed on the House of Commons Survey Tool.
A total of 2,500 public office holders subject to the Act were invited to take the survey via an email sent directly to them from the Commissioner's email account.
A follow-up reminder email was sent out a few days before the survey was closed.
The survey was officially open for 12 days, from January 22 to February 2, 2024.
There were 454 survey respondents, resulting in an 18% response rate.
The average survey completion time was just over 4 minutes.
Respondents could complete the survey in the official language of their choice (87% opted for English and 13% for French).
Statistical significance
For questions where everyone responded (n=454) it can be stated that the survey responses represent the views of all public office holders subject to the Act within ±4.25 percentage points at a 95% confidence level.
This assertion does not extend to qualitative open-ended responses or follow-up questions to certain subgroups. For these, the sample size (n) and/or a revised margin of error are provided for reference.
Note to readers
Key findings are presented in the sections that follow. An exact copy of the survey questions and survey instrument used has been provided in Appendix B.
Key overall takeaways
Positive overall impression of the Office: Most respondents believe that the Office is a credible (79%), impartial (77%), helpful (70%), and trustworthy (81%) organization.
High familiarity with obligations under the Act: The overwhelming majority of respondents (97%) stated they are familiar with their obligations under the Act.
High satisfaction with one-on-one service delivery: Most respondents that have recently interacted with an Office employee (one-on-one) were satisfied with their experience (88%) and thought that the employee was courteous and helpful (94%), provided a timely and accurate response (91%), and provided them with the information they needed (87%).
Satisfaction with training/education provided by the Office: Most respondents reported overall satisfaction (83%) with the most recent educational session they attended.
Strong appreciation of personalized service: Respondents identified personal interactions with advisors as the greatest added value the Office provides for them.
Preference for online training: When asked about preferred training methods, most respondents stated they prefer online training with a live presenter.
The top three preferred training topics are (in order):
Initial compliance process
Material changes (assets, activities, etc.)
Gift rules and reporting
In general, similar results as the 2022 survey: The survey results were once again positive overall with further improvements in certain areas.
Comparison to the 2022 Survey of Public Office Holders
In January 2022, the Office conducted its first survey of public office holders. The 2024 survey of public office holders is the second survey of its kind. The structure and questions of the 2024 survey were purposefully designed to be comparable to the 2022 survey. This allows the Office to track progress over time. The
2022 survey report is available on the Office website.
Use of new survey tool in 2024
In 2022, the survey was developed, tested, and deployed on the NOVI survey platform. However, a new custom survey tool was used for the 2024 survey, called the “House of Commons Survey Tool." This altered the overall look and feel of the 2024 survey and required some adjustments due to the differences in layout and reporting capabilities. In certain cases, the format of specific questions and wording had to be adjusted to fit the new survey tool. These variances should be kept in mind when comparing results between the two surveys.
Respondent breakdown
Time as public office holders
Slightly more than half of survey respondents (57%) indicated that they have been in their roles for less than five years.
Less than 1 year
| 11%
|
1 to 5 years
| 46%
|
6 to 10 years
| 30%
|
11 to 15 years
| 5%
|
Over 15 years
| 8%
|
Figure 1 - Time as a public office holder
Role as public office holders
The largest proportion of respondents (30%) were part-time tribunal/board/commission members. Approximately 13% of respondents did not place themselves in the role they belong to or did not feel they belong to any of the provided roles.
Embassy / consulate staff
| 3%
|
Ministerial staff
| 13%
|
Other
| 13%
|
Head of a department, agency, Crown corporation or another federal organization
| 15%
|
Full-time tribunal/board/ commission member
| 26%
|
Part-time tribunal/board/ commission member
| 30%
|
Figure 2 - Role as a public office holder
Familiarity with obligations under the Conflict of Interest Act
Most respondents (97%) were either somewhat familiar or very familiar with their obligations. Less than 1% stated that they were not at all familiar with their obligations.
General findings
Perceptions of the Office
General opinion of the Office
Respondents were asked whether they agree with the statement: “My general opinion of the Office is positive." According to the results, 77% of respondents strongly or somewhat agreed with this statement and 13% of respondents did not agree or disagreed. The remaining 8 % somewhat or strongly disagreed.
Strongly disagree
| 3%
|
Somewhat disagree
| 5%
|
Neither agree / disagree
| 13%
|
Somewhat agree
| 26%
|
Strongly agree
| 51%
|
Not answered
| 2%
|
Figure 3 - General opinion of the Office
Perception differences (by role)
In the table below, results have been reflected by role to better illustrate how it might affect their perception of the Office. For example, part-time members do not have reporting obligations and therefore do not interact as frequently with the Office, which may affect how they perceive it.
In this question, respondents were presented with several statements about the Office and asked to indicate how strongly they agreed or disagreed. The percentages in the table below represent those who answered “strongly agree" or “somewhat agree."[2]
All respondents | 79% | 81% | 74% | 77% | 70% |
Ministerial staff | 79% | 81% | 74% | 88% | 70% |
Heads of departments | 90% | 90% | 83% | 91% | 91% |
Full-time members | 79% | 79% | 71% | 73% | 70% |
Part-time members | 81% | 87% | 75% | 77% | 66% |
Embassy/consulate staff | 70% | 62% | 84% | 62% | 62% |
Other | 69% | 73% | 66% | 69% | 58% |
Table 1 - Perceptions of the Office based on respondents' profiles
The overall respondent agreement level with the Office being a helpful organization came in at 70%. This was the lowest score out of the provided attributes.
Satisfaction with one-on-one service
Respondents were also asked to think back on their most recent one-on-one interaction with an employee of the Office and indicate how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the provided statements.
The sentiment was quite positive, with those that agree with each statement seldom falling under 85%. Positive responses were weaker among the “Other" group.
All respondents | 94% | 91% | 91% | 87% | 88% |
Ministerial staff | 87% | 91% | 96% | 96% | 93% |
Heads of departments | 96% | 93% | 96% | 95% | 95% |
Full-time members | 84% | 92% | 88% | 92% | 84% |
Part-time members | 94% | 100% | 94% | 94% | 93% |
Embassy/consulate staff | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% | 100% |
Other | 80% | 80% | 86% | 100% | 73% |
Table 2 - Perception of most recent one-on-one interaction based on respondents' profiles
Out of the 7% of people that stated they were dissatisfied with their experience, the top complaint was with the service quality, such as insufficient or inconsistent advice. Others, still, had complaints about the rules the Office enforces.
Greatest value-add
Respondents were asked to answer an open-ended question as follows: “Which service or program offered by the Office has the greatest added value in terms of supporting you in meeting your compliance requirements?"
Upon categorizing the 247 responses received, “personal interaction with an advisor" came out as the greatest value-add of the Office. Respondents appreciated the quick and clear advice they received that related specifically to their situations. The second most cited value-add was “the general communications that the Office provides" followed by “the Office's annual update notices."
Training
Educational session attendance
Nearly a quarter of respondents (24 %) indicated that they attended a training provided by the Office in the last two years.
Training impressions
Respondents were asked to think back about their training experience and indicate how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the provided statements. According to the results, 83 % expressed satisfaction with their experience. The majority of respondents indicated that the sessions were clear (83%), helpful (79%), and that they were given the information needed (74%). Only 23% of respondents agreed with the statement that the sessions were too long.
Training topics
The training topics of greatest interest are as follows (in order):[3]
Initial compliance process
Material change (assets, activities, etc.)
Recusals (private interests)
Penalties and investigations
Gifts rules and reporting
Post-employment rules
Respondents were also given an opportunity to state other training topics they would like to see that were not listed in the survey question. After categorizing these open-ended responses, it was determined that most of the specific topics mentioned could effectively be placed into one of the existing categories. A few requested specific training related to assets, property ownership, and financial reporting.
Training methods
Most respondents (61%) prefer to receive conflict-of-interest-related information proactively rather than searching for it on their own (19 %).
The preferred methods of training were stated to be as follows (in order):[4]
Scheduled online educational session on a specific topic with live presenters
Self-paced online training module
One-on-one personalized training
Customized educational group session for organization
Online questions and answers session
All respondents ranked “scheduled online educational session" as their preferred training method. “Self-paced online module" was ranked second by all. Embassy and ministerial staff ranked “one-on-one personalized training" highly.
Training frequency
Respondents were almost equally divided between preferring to receive training annually (32%), when topical (30%) and quarterly (29%). Very few said monthly (3%) or never (3%).
Communications
Perceived tone of the Office's communication methods
When asked about the tone of the Office's communications, 85% of respondents agreed that the tone was clear, 90% agreed that it was professional and 89% agreed that it was respectful.
Preferred method of communication from the Office
Respondents were asked to rate the existing methods of the Office's communications based on their helpfulness. The percentage in the table below reflects the number of respondents who stated the method in question was either
somewhat or
extremelyhelpful.
Emails from the Commissioner
| 85%
|
Generic emails from the Office (not specifically from the Commissioner)
| 79%
|
Information notices (often in PDF or HTML format)
| 65%
|
The website (ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca)
| 58%
|
The Office's X (Twitter) pages
@EthicsCanada | @EthiqueCanada
| 11%
|
The Office's LinkedIn Page
| 11%
|
Figure 4- Most helpful methods of communications
As can be seen, emails from the Commissioner came out on top (85%), followed closely by generic emails from the Office and information notices. Social media (LinkedIn and X/Twitter) was only helpful to about 11% of respondents. The majority of respondents (over 65%) indicated that they do not recall coming across the Office's social media platforms.
Preferred private (one-on-one) communications methods
Respondents were asked how helpful they found the Office's one-on-one methods of communications. Currently, the Office interacts with public office holders via email or by phone. In-person meetings are infrequent, even during pre-pandemic times. Emails, phone calls, and video conferences are the preferred methods of communication. Over 74% of respondents ranked in-person meetings as not applicable.
Email
| 84%
|
Phone
| 49%
|
Video conference (e.g., MS Teams)
| 32%
|
In-person meeting
| 20%
|
Additional suggested communications methods
Respondents were also asked to comment on other forms of public and private communication that they would like to see adopted. Only about 8% responded (n=38). The suggested additional methods included text messaging, Instagram, and newsletters.
Definitions
Initial compliance process – All reporting public office holders must complete an initial compliance process. This means they have to give the Office certain information. When they disclose their information, advisors can help them arrange their affairs to avoid conflicts of interest. Initial compliance is completed within 120 days after a reporting public office holder's appointment, or after their reappointment if there is a gap since their last term of office. Once they complete the process, it is easier for public office holders to comply with the Act going forward.
Material change – This is a change to any matter that reporting public officer holders are required to include in their Confidential Report and that could affect their obligations under the Act and make it necessary to modify their compliance arrangements. Examples of material changes are acquiring assets valued at $10,000 or more, becoming a trustee or a beneficiary of a trust, or opening any type of investment account.
Recusals – The Act requires public office holders to recuse themselves from any discussion, decision, debate or vote on any matter in respect of which they would be in a conflict of interest. Respondents might want to know how to determine if a matter presents a conflict of interest, how to properly document recusals, and how to calculate the scope of discussions from which they must recuse themselves.
Penalties and investigations – Penalties are the punishments that public office holders might receive for violating certain requirements set out in the Act. These penalties can go up to $500 and are published in the public registry.
Investigations under the Act are called “examinations." The Commissioner can launch an examination of a possible contravention of the Conflict of Interest Act at the request of a Senator or a Member of the House of Commons who provides reasonable grounds to believe the Act has been contravened.
Gifts rules and reporting – Public office holders must disclose any gifts or other advantages from any one source, other than relatives and friends, that exceed $200 in value in a 12-month period, within 30 days after acceptance or of the day on which their total value exceeds $200. Gifts can take many forms: meals, tickets to events, reduced rate or free membership to clubs or organizations, money, among other things.
Post-employment rules – The Act has several provisions relating to post-employment, some limited and some unlimited. For instance, depending on public office holders' former positions, they must wait one or two years before working with a party with which they had “direct and significant dealings" during their time in office. This is commonly known as the “cooling-off" period and is a limited provision. However, there are also the following three rules, which apply for life to all former public office holders. They cannot:
take improper advantage of their previous public office;
switch sides, meaning act for or on behalf of any person or organization in relation to a specific proceeding, transaction, negotiation or case in which they previously acted for or provided advice to the government;
provide advice to a client, business associate or employer using information they obtained while in office that is not available to the public.
Footnotes
1 - The previous Survey of Public Office Holders took place in 2022.
2 - Between 4% and 16% of the respondents answered “Neither agree nor disagree."
3 - Survey respondents were given six options of topics about which they might receive training. They were asked to rank these topics from 1 to 6, 1 being the topic most interesting to them, and 6 being the least.
4 - Survey respondents were given five options of topics about which they might receive training. They were asked to rank these methods from 1 to 5, 1 being the method most preferred, and 5 being the least.
Appendix A – Survey results
Impressions of the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
1.
How familiar are you with your obligations under the Conflict of Interest Act?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Very familiar
| 256
| 56.4%
|
Somewhat familiar
| 186
| 41.0%
|
Not very familiar
| 8
| 1.8%
|
Not at all familiar
| 1
| 0.2%
|
Skipped question or chose not to answer
|
3
|
0.6%
|
2.
Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about the Office:
Question type: Matrix & Multimatrix
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
I am well aware of Office's mandate
| 13 (2.9%)
| 18 (4.0%)
| 4 (0.9%)
| 173 (38.1%)
| 226 (49.8%)
| 4 (0.9%)
|
My general opinion of the Office is positive
| 15 (3.3%)
| 21 (4.6%)
| 60 (13.2%)
| 120 (26.4%)
| 230 (50.7%)
| 8 (1.8%)
|
The Office is credible
| 13 (2.9%)
| 12 (2.6%)
| 54 (11.9%)
| 91 (20.0%)
| 270 (59.5%)
| 14 (3.1%)
|
The Office is trustworthy
| 10 (2.2%)
| 10 (2.2%)
| 48 (10.6%)
| 80 (17.6%)
| 291 (64.1%)
| 15 (3.3%)
|
The Office proactively reaches out to me
| 11 (2.4%)
| 24 (5.3%)
| 68 (15.0%)
| 143 (31.5%)
| 193 (42.5%)
| 15 (3.3%)
|
The Office is impartial
| 13 (2.9%)
| 12 (2.6%)
| 60 (13.2%)
| 85 (18.7%)
| 266 (58.6%)
| 18 (4.0%)
|
The Office is helpful
| 12 (2.6%)
| 18 (4.9%)
| 73 (16.1%)
| 115 (25.3%)
| 203 (44.7%)
| 33 (7.3%)
|
I feel comfortable approaching the Office if I need to
| 14 (3.1%)
| 17 (3.7%)
| 33 (7.3%)
| 85 (18.7%)
| 284 (62.6%)
| 21 (4.6%)
|
Impressions of private interactions
3.
Thinking of the past 12 months, did you privately interact (one-on-one) with someone from the Office?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
No
| 252
| 55.5%
|
Yes
| 201
| 44.5%
|
Skipped question or chose not to answer
|
1
|
0.2%
|
IF YES:
a) Thinking of the past 12 months, approximately how many times did you privately interact (one-on-one) with someone from the Office?
Question type: Numerical, Range 1-50, dependent on Question 1 in section 2.
Number of “not applicable": 252
Number of respondents: 201
1
| 53
| 26.4%
|
2
| 60
| 29.9%
|
3
| 26
| 12.9%
|
4
| 14
| 7.0%
|
5
| 21
| 10.4%
|
6
| 10
| 5.0%
|
8
| 3
| 1.5%
|
10
| 8
| 4.0%
|
11
| 1
| 0.5%
|
15
| 1
| 0.5%
|
18
| 1
| 0.5%
|
20
| 1
| 0.5%
|
36
| 1
| 0.5%
|
50
| 1
| 0.5%
|
b) Thinking of your most recent private interaction (one-on-one) with the OCIEC, indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.
Question type: Matrix & Multimatrix
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
The employee was courteous and helpful
| 5 (2.5%)
| 0 (0.0%)
| 5 (2.5%)
| 25 (12.4%)
| 164 (81.6%)
| 2 (1.0%)
|
The employee gave me accurate information
| 4 (2.0%)
| 5 (2.5%)
| 3 (1.5%)
| 27 (13.4%)
| 157 (78.1%)
| 5 (2.5%)
|
The employee gave me a timely response
| 3 (1.5%)
| 5 (2.5%)
| 3 (1.5%)
| 32 (15.9%)
| 153 (76.1%)
| 5 (2.5%)
|
I was given the information I needed
| 3 (1.5%)
| 5 (2.5%)
| 9 (4.5%)
| 28 (13.9%)
| 148 (73.6%)
| 8 (4.0%)
|
Overall, I was satisfied with my experience
| 8 (4.0%)
| 6 (3.0%)
| 7 (3.5%)
| 32 (15.9%)
| 146 (72.6%)
| 2 (1.0%)
|
c) Do you have any other comments about your most recent private interaction (one-on-one) with the Office?
Question type: Open-ended
Number of responses: 201
Number of respondents: 53
Not answered: 148
Impression of the Office's communication methods
4.
How helpful or unhelpful do you find the following communication methods?
Question type: Matrix & Multimatrix
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Website (ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca)
| 17 (3.7%)
| 186 (41.0%)
| 77 (17.0%)
| 169 (37.2%)
| 5 (1.1%)
|
Emails from the Commissioner
| 9 (2.0%)
| 219 (48.2%)
| 169 (37.2%)
| 52 (11.5%)
| 5 (1.1%)
|
Generic emails from the Office (not specifically from the Commissioner)
| 26 (5.7%)
| 260 (57.3%)
| 98 (21.6%)
| 63 (13.9%)
| 7 (1.5%)
|
Information notices (often in PDF or HTML format)
| 28 (6.2%)
| 194 (42.7%)
| 100 (22.0%)
| 126 (27.8%)
| 6 (1.3%)
|
The Office's X (Twitter) pages @EthicsCanada | @EthiqueCanada
| 98 (21.6%)
| 13 (2.9%)
| 13 (2.9%)
| 296 (65.2%)
| 11 (2.4%)
|
The Office's LinkedIn page
| 84 (18.5%)
| 41 (9.0%)
| 8 (1.8%)
| 310 (68.3%)
| 11 (2.4%)
|
5. Are there any methods for communicating with you that you would like the Office to adopt going forward?
(Other social media platforms, text messages, instant messengers, etc.)
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Yes
| 38
| 8.4%
|
No
| 408
| 89.9%
|
Skipped question or chose not to answer
|
8
|
1.8%
|
IF YES:
What method(s) do you prefer?
Question type: Open-ended
Number of responses: 38
Number of respondents: 38
a) Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about the overall tone of group emails sent by the Office:
Question type: Matrix and multimatrix
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
The overall tone is clear | 5 (1.1%) | 9 (2.0%) | 40 (8.8%) | 136 (30.0%) | 250 (55.1%) | 14 (3.1%) |
The overall tone is professional | 4 (0.9%) | 3 (0.7%) | 25 (5.5%) | 78 (17.2%) | 330 (72.7%) | 14 (3.1%) |
The overall tone is respectful | 4 (0.9%) | 6 (1.3%) | 21 (4.6%) | 84 (18.5%) | 323 (71.1%) | 16 (3.5%) |
b) How helpful or unhelpful do you find the following official private (one-on-one) communication methods?
Question type: Matrix and multimatrix
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Emails | 4 (0.9%) | 114 (25.2%) | 270 (50.5%) | 62 (13.7%) | 4 (0.9%) |
Phone calls | 13 (2.9%) | 58 (12.8%) | 163 (35.9%) | 214 (47.1%) | 6 (1.3%) |
Videoconferences | 14 (3.1%) | 64 (14.1%) | 83 (18.3%) | 290 (63.9%) | 3 (0.7%) |
In-person meetings | 15 (3.3%) | 36 (7.9%) | 55 (12.2%) | 339 (74.7%) | 9 (2.0%)
|
c) Do you have any other comments about these private (one-on-one) communication methods?
Question type: Open-ended
Number of respondents: 454
Number of responses: 39
Number of “not answered": 415
Training and education
6. Thinking of the past two years, did you attend an educational session organized by the Office?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Yes | 109 | 24.0% |
No | 339 | 74.7% |
Skipped question or chose not to answer
|
6 |
1.3% |
IF YES:
a) Thinking of the past two years, approximately how many times did you attend an educational session organized by the Office?
Question type: Numerical, Range 1-20, dependent on Question 1 in Section 4.
Number of “not applicable": 345
Number of respondents: 109
1 | 86 | 78.9% |
2 | 16 | 14.7% |
3 | 4 | 3.7% |
4 | 3 | 2.8% |
b) Thinking of your most recent educational session, indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
Question type: Matrix and multimatrix, dependent on Question 1 in Section 4.
Number of responses: 109
Number of respondents: 109
This session was helpful | 2 (1.8%) | 11 (10.1%) | 10 (9.2%) | 60 (55.0%) | 26 (23.9%) | 0 (0.0%) |
The session was clear | 1 (0.9%) | 9 (8.3%) | 9 (8.3%) | 48 (44.0%) | 42 (38.5%) | 0 (0.0%) |
The session was to long | 13 (11.9%) | 22 (20.3%) | 49 (45.0%) | 20 (18.3%) | 5 (4.6%) | 0 (0.0%) |
I was given the information needed | 1 (0.9%) | 13 (11.9%) | 15 (13.8%) | 53 (48.6%) | 27 (24.8%) | 0 (0.0%) |
Overall, I was satisfied with my experience | 2 (1.8%) | 9 (8.3%) | 14 (12.8%) | 57 (52.3%) | 26 (23.9%) | 1 (0.9%)
|
c) Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
Question type: Matrix and multimatrix
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
I prefer to find conflict-of-interest-related information on my own, when I need it, rather than having it sent to me proactively | 95 (20.9%) | 176 (38.8%) | 91 (20.0%) | 75 (16.5%) | 11 (2.4%) | 6 (1.3%) |
I am interested in educational opportunities offered by the Office | 21 (4.6%) | 40 (8.8%) | 102 (22.5%) | 186 (41.0%) | 94 (20.7%) | 11 (2.4%)
|
d) Please rank the following Office related topics in order of importance - 1 being the most important to you and 6 being the least important.
Question type: Rating and ranking
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Scale: 1-6
Gift rules and reporting | 64 (14.4%) | 72 (16.6%) | 88 (20.4%) | 79 (18.7%) | 74 (17.8%) | 48 (11.4%) | 30 (10.2%) |
Material Changes and ongoing reporting | 100 (22.9%) | 112 (25.9%) | 84 (19.4%) | 59 (14.0%) | 43 (10.4%) | 31 (7.4%) | 25 (15.2%) |
Recusals and disclosures | 76 (17.4%) | 98 (22.6%) | 93 (21.5%) | 75 (17.8%) | 58 (14.0%) | 27 (6.4%) | 27 (16.4%) |
Penalties and investigations | 14 (3.2%) | 31 (7.2%) | 35 (8.1%) | 82 (19.4%) | 104 (25.1%) | 158 (37.5%) | 30 (18.2%) |
Post-employment rules and obligations | 47 (10.8%) | 67 (15.5%) | 82 (19.0%) | 80 (19.0%) | 91 (21.9%) | 61 (14.5%) | 26 (15.8%) |
Initial compliance process | 136 (16.4%) | 53 (12.2%) | 50 (11.6%) | 47 (11.1%) | 45 (10.8%) | 96 (22.8%) | 27 (22.8%)
|
e) Are there any other topics that you would like the Office to provide more information and/or training on?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Yes
| 30 | 6.6% |
No | 409 | 90.1% |
Skipped question or chose not to answer |
15 |
3.3% |
IF YES:
What are the topics?
Question type: Open-ended
Number of respondents: 454
Number of responses: 30
Number of “not answered": 424
f) Please rank the following training delivery formats in order of preference - 1 being the most preferred and 5 being the least preferred
Question type: Rating and ranking
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 455
Scale: 1-5
Scheduled online educational session on a specific topic with live presenters | 154 (36.8%) | 116 (28.2%) | 76 (18.5%) | 43 (10.6%) | 23 (5.7%) | 42 (19.4%) |
Self-paced online training module | 123 (29.4%) | 103 (25.2%) | 67 (16.3%) | 68 (16.6%) | 53 (13.2%) | 40 (18.5%) |
One-on-one personalized training | 47 (11.2%) | 38 (9.2%) | 71 (17.3%) | 96 (23.4%) | 157 (39.0%) | 45 (20.8%) |
Customized educational group session for your organization | 71 (16.9%) | 86 (20.9%) | 96 (23.4%) | 97 (23.7%) | 58 (14.4%) | 46 (21.3%) |
Online question and answers session | 24 (5.7%) | 68 (16.5%) | 101 (24.6%) | 106 (25.9%) | 112 (27.8%) | 43 (29.9%) |
g) How often should the Office be offering live educational opportunities?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Never
| 12 | 2.6% |
Annually | 143 | 31.5% |
Quarterly | 131 | 28.9% |
Monthly | 14 | 3.1% |
When topical | 138 | 30.4% |
Other | 9 | 2.0% |
Final thoughts
7. Which service or program offered by the Office has the greatest added value in terms of supporting you in meeting your compliance requirements?
Question type: Open-ended
Number of responses: 247
Number of respondents: 454
Not answered: 207
8. Which role best describes you as a public office holder?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Head of Department, Agency, Crown Corporation or another federal organization | 69 | 15.2% |
Ministerial Staff | 58 | 12.8% |
Full-time Tribunal/Board/Commissions Member | 118 | 26.0% |
Part-time Tribunal/Board/Commissions Member | 135 | 29.7% |
Embassy/Consulate Staff | 13 | 2.9% |
Other | 59 | 13.0% |
Skipped question or chose not to answer |
2 |
0.4% |
9. About how long have you been a public office holder?
Question type: Multiple choice
Number of responses: 454
Number of respondents: 454
Less than 1 year | 48 | 10.6% |
1 to 5 years | 210 | 46.3% |
6 to 10 years | 134 | 29.5% |
11 to 15 years | 22 | 4.8% |
Over 15 years | 35 | 1.1% |
Skipped question or chose not to answer |
5 |
1.1% |
10. Do you have any additional suggestions or comments for the Office that could help us better serve you?
Question type: Open-ended
Number of responses: 106
Number of respondents: 454
Not answered: 348
Link to survey questions
Impressions of the Office of the Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner
1.
How familiar are you with your obligations under the Conflict of Interest Act?
Very familiar
Somewhat familiar
Not very familiar
Not at all familiar
2.
Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about the Office:
I am well aware of Office's mandate
|
| | | | | |
My general opinion of the Office is positive
| | | | | | |
The Office is credible
| | | | | | |
The Office is trustworthy
| | | | | | |
The Office proactively reaches out to me
| | | | | | |
The Office is impartial
| | | | | | |
The Office is helpful
| | | | | | |
I feel comfortable approaching the Office if I need to
| | | | | | |
Impressions of private interactions
3.
Thinking of the past 12 months, did you privately interact (one-on-one) with someone from the Office?
IF YES:
a) Thinking of the past 12 months, approximately how many times did you privately interact (one-on-one) with someone from the Office?
Range: 1 - 50
b) Thinking of your most recent private interaction (one-on-one) with the OCIEC, indicate the extent to which you agree or disagree with each of the following statements.
The employee was courteous and helpful
|
| | | | | |
The employee gave me accurate information
| | | | | | |
The employee gave me a timely response
| | | | | | |
I was given the information I needed
| | | | | | |
Overall, I was satisfied with my experience
| | | | | | |
c) Do you have any other comments about your most recent private interaction (one-on-one) with the Office?
Impression of the Office's communication methods
4.
How helpful or unhelpful do you find the following communication methods?
Website (ciec-ccie.parl.gc.ca)
| | | | | | |
Emails from the Commissioner
| | | | | | |
Generic emails from the Office (not specifically from the Commissioner)
| | | | | | |
Information notices (often in PDF or HTML format)
| | | | | | |
The Office's X (Twitter) pages @EthicsCanada | @EthiqueCanada
| | | | | | |
The Office's LinkedIn page
| | | | | | |
5. Are there any methods for communicating with you that you would like the Office to adopt going forward?
(Other social media platforms, text messages, instant messengers, etc.)
IF YES:
What method(s) do you prefer?
a) Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements about the overall tone of group emails sent by the Office:
The overall tone is clear
|
| | | | | |
The overall tone is professional
| | | | | | |
The overall tone is respectful
| | | | | | |
b) How helpful or unhelpful do you find the following official private (one-on-one) communication methods?
Emails
| | | | | | |
Phone calls
| | | | | | |
Videoconference (e.g., MS Teams)
| | | | | | |
In-person meeting
| | | | | | |
c) Do you have any other comments about these private (one-on-one) communication methods?
Training and education
6. Thinking of the past two years, did you attend an educational session organized by the Office?
IF YES:
a) Thinking of the past two years, approximately how many times did you attend an educational session organized by the Office?
Range: 1 - 20
b) Thinking of your most recent educational session, indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
The session was helpful
| | | | | |
The session was clear
| | | | | |
The session was too long | | | | | |
I was given the information I needed
| | | | | |
Overall I was satisfied with my experience
| | | | | |
c) Please indicate how much you agree or disagree with each of the following statements:
I prefer to find conflict-of-interest related information on my own, when I need it, rather than having it sent to me proactively
| | | | | |
I am interested in educational opportunities offered by the Office
| | | | | |
d) Please rank the following Office related topics in order of importance - 1 being the most important to you and 6 being the least important.
Gift rules and reporting
Material changes (assets, activities, etc.) and ongoing reporting
Recusals (private interests) and disclosures
Penalties and investigations
Post-employment rules and obligations
Initial compliance process
e) Are there any other topics that you would like the Office to provide more information and/or training on?
IF YES:
What are the topics?
f) Please rank the following training delivery formats in order of preference - 1 being the most preferred and 5 being the least preferred
Scheduled online educational session on a specific topic with live presenters
Self-paced online training module
One-on-one personalized training
Customized educational group session for your organization
Online questions and answers session
g) How often should the Office be offering live educational opportunities?
Never
Annually
Quarterly
Monthly
When topical
Other
Final thoughts
7. Which service or program offered by the Office has the greatest added value in terms of supporting you in meeting your compliance requirements?
Please only state the top item that comes to mind:
8. Which role best describes you as a public office holder?
Head of a department, agency, Crown corporation or another federal organization
Ministerial staff
Full-time tribunal/board/commission member
Part-time tribunal/board/commission member
Embassy/consulate staff
Other
9. About how long have you been a public office holder?
Less than 1 year
1 to 5 years
6 to 10 years
11 to 15 years
Over 15 years
10. Do you have any additional suggestions or comments for the Office that could help us better serve you?
