Public servants’ use of personal social media: Purpose of the guidance

On this page

• Introduction
• Purpose: What is this guidance and why was it created?
• Public service and non-partisanship
• Our guide - the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector
• Terminology

Introduction

Social media is how we stay connected, consume news and entertainment, express ourselves, and much more. It’s everywhere, which can bring challenges: how do we separate the personal and the professional? How much do our responsibilities as public servants influence what we can or should post online?

These questions do not have easy answers. Different public servants will have different considerations depending on their specific circumstances, such as responsibilities, lived experiences and level of seniority. However, we need a common understanding.

Public servants, like all Canadians, have the right to freedom of thought, belief, opinion, association and expression under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. As an inclusive public service that strives to be representative of the public we serve, our diversity and varied lived experiences enrich our overall ability to deliver excellence for Canada and Canadians.

However, we also have responsibilities because of our role as public servants. Our work is essential to Canada’s well-being, and a professional, non-partisan, and impartial federal public service is integral to our democracy. As public servants, we are expected to uphold the trust and confidence of Canadians in the government and the public service.

There are many positive uses of social media. Public servants have built vibrant communities to share best practices and foster collaboration. When we share our success stories, we show an effective and highly skilled public service that delivers excellence for Canadians. These activities foster trust both within and outside of the public service.

But we need to be mindful of risks. When Canadians see a social media post from a public servant, they might perceive that post to be representative of a government position. Or they might question whether the public servant who posted it is able to act in a non-partisan and impartial manner. When colleagues see a post with disrespectful language, it can harm our trust in each other. When a public servant’s posts that contain partisan language get amplified in some way, such as through media attention or going viral, it can diminish the confidence that elected officials have in the public service.

Personal actions can have significant consequences. This is especially true online where our social media footprint is essentially a permanent record. As we have seen many times over the past decade, social media posts can have impacts that we never intended or imagined: posts can go viral unexpectedly, screenshots can be taken and disclosed publicly, and information can be taken out of context.

Ultimately, public servants need to have good judgment online. This guidance supports decision-making in 2 ways:

1. There are reflection questions to help public servants understand the risks of online activities. These questions can also help foster dialogue about social media use in our organizations.
2. There are examples of types of online activity that are considered potentially appropriate, risky and inappropriate. These examples are illustrative and non-exhaustive.

This guidance aims to help us understand how our online activities can impact public trust, team cohesion, our professional credibility, and the confidence of the government. It’s about how we live up to our values and ethics every day.

Purpose: What is this guidance and why was it created?

In September 2023, the Clerk of the Privy Council formed the Deputy Ministers’ Task Team on Values and Ethics to lead a conversation with public servants on how to bring our Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector to life in a dynamic and increasingly complex environment. The task team received requests from public servants for guidance on the use of social media and recommended in their December 2023 report that such guidance be developed for public servants.

This guidance document aims to bring together information about our responsibilities as public servants when we use personal social media, on personal devices, on non-Government of Canada networks and on personal time. It does not set out new policy or requirements as the requirements are set out in the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector, organizational codes of conduct, the Directive on Conflict of Interest, the Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) oath or affirmation and other legislation and policies. This guidance clarifies how they apply to our personal use of social media as public servants.

It is not meant to discourage personal use of social media platforms; rather, it aims to create understanding of how to live up to our responsibility as public servants and promote a professional, non-partisan, and impartial public service that inspires the trust and confidence of Canadians while respecting our individual right to freedom of expression.

The requirements for the use of official federal government social media accounts or use of government networks or devices are available in:

• Directive on the Management of Communications and Federal Identity
• Directive on Service and Digital
• Guideline on Acceptable Network and Device Use
• Guideline on Service and Digital

Public service and non-partisanship

A non-partisan and impartial public service has been a guiding principle since the coming into force of the Civil Service Amendment Act, 1908. As described in the Public Service Commission’s report Public Service Impartiality: Taking Stock:

“Impartiality is integral to the calling of a professional public service in Canada’s federal government. An impartial public service allows Canadians, regardless of their political views, to expect fair, objective treatment from public servants. It also provides a great measure of stability for a country whose parliamentary system means governments can be long- or short-lived, since large sections of the public service are not replaced following elections. The knowledge and experience of professional public servants are vital to Canada’s system of democracy.”

The report goes on to state:

“impartiality is part of the calling of a professional public servant. To preserve the real and perceived non-partisanship of the public service, public servants are expected to serve the Crown (as represented by the government of the day) loyally and impartially, regardless of the party in power.”

Lastly, it clarifies that:

“Public servants also fulfill their obligation to maintain an impartial public service by refraining, outside the context allowed by the PSEA, from participation in political activities that may jeopardize the perception of non-partisanship or cause people to doubt their loyalty. This should not be taken to mean that public servants cannot participate in political activities. On this subject, the PSEA is clear. Public servants have the right to participate in political activities as long as the activities do not impair, or are not perceived as impairing, the impartiality of the public service. This approach is consistent with the rulings of the Supreme Court, ..., which provide that public servants’ constitutional right to freedom of expression should only be circumscribed to the extent necessary to allow them to carry out their duties in an impartial way.”

Our guide - the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector

The Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector outlines the values and expected behaviours that guide us in all our activities:

• respect for democracy
• respect for people
• integrity
• stewardship
• excellence

Underlying the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector is the fundamental principle of duty of loyalty, which guides our conduct as federal public servants, including our conduct on personal social media. As public servants, we agree to:

• uphold the Constitution and laws
• serve the public interest
• maintain confidentiality
• practice non-partisanship and impartiality
• demonstrate respect for democracy, integrity, honesty and accountability

The duty of loyalty is a key principle and obligation for public servants. It stems from the core mission to assist the elected government in serving the public interest, in accordance with the law. This duty justifiably limits public servants’ freedom of expression, particularly when their public statements could damage the reputation of the Government of Canada. The duty of loyalty is based on the understanding that these statements—especially harsh or persistent criticism of government policy—can undermine the public’s trust in the public service’s ability to support the elected government effectively.

The duty of loyalty must be balanced with an employee’s freedom of expression. The balancing of these interests is likely to result in an exception to the duty of loyalty in the following 3 situations:

• The government is engaged in illegal acts
• Government policies jeopardize life, health or safety
• The public servant’s criticism has no impact on their ability to perform effectively the duties of a public servant or on the public perception of that ability

In situations where you are unsure whether there is an exception that applies, contact your organization’s values and ethics office or your manager.

Social media should not be used for disclosing allegations of wrongdoing in the public service, but rather through mechanisms designed for this purpose, as this ensures that complete information is provided and that appropriate measures can be taken in response. This approach helps protect the rights of all parties involved and ensures that the investigation is conducted fairly and thoroughly. There are avenues to disclose wrongdoing in the public service available under the Public Servants Disclosure Protection Act. Public servants can disclose allegations of wrongdoing to their Senior officers for disclosure of wrongdoing (accessible only on the Government of Canada network) or to the Office of the Public Sector Integrity Commissioner of Canada.

Public service organizations are subject to the Directive on Conflict of Interest (directive). The directive requires public servants to prevent and resolve any real, apparent or potential conflicts of interest between their official responsibilities and their private affairs in favour of the public interest. The directive also describes the obligation to report any conflicts of interest, whether they are real, apparent or potential.

Lastly, each organization in the federal public service has a unique code of conduct that addresses their particular mandate and their day-to-day operations, in addition to the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector.

When we join the public service, we all agree to act in accordance with the values and expected behaviours outlined in the Values and Ethics Code for the Public Sector (and the underlying duty of loyalty), our organizational codes of conduct, and the directive.

Terminology

In this guidance, when we refer to “social media,” we are addressing a comprehensive array of online activities across various platforms, websites and applications with varying degrees of public access to content. These platforms include but are not limited to:

• social networking sites like Facebook, X, Bluesky, Instagram, or Snapchat
• professional sites like LinkedIn
• video sharing platforms like YouTube and TikTok
• blogs
• online forums such as Reddit
• review websites like TripAdvisor, Amazon or Google
• comment sections on news articles or brand websites

The online activities we are considering range from posting content and uploading photos (including themed frames, avatars or captions) to participating in online petitions, commenting on various posts, sharing memes, liking others’ content, and sending direct messages on networking platforms. When we mention “posts,” “comments,” or “posting” or “sharing” throughout this guidance, we are using these terms as a convenient way to encompass all types of online activity.

In the federal public service, “impartiality recognizes that, for desired expectations and outcomes, various options deserve consideration in the public policy process. This perspective recognizes that ministers require thoughtful and credible advice covering a range of aspects related to the public interest. It also recognizes that citizens and taxpayers deserve services and policies that place the public interest ahead of the personal and ideological preferences of public servants. In practice, impartiality often requires public servants to refrain from opinions, positions or actions that demonstrate a bias toward or against a particular cause or course of action, including the defence of government policies. In analyzing options, public servants will consider the best evidence-based knowledge. They will base their recommendations on the desired outcomes and implement the decisions lawfully taken by ministers, even if these decisions differ from the advice or recommendations provided. A politically impartial public service supports the government of whichever political party the electorate chooses.^{Footnote 1}”

“Partisanship is the act of supporting a party, person or cause. Partisanship refers in general to actions supporting or opposing political parties or biases. Although the primary concern for the public service is “political partisanship,” other types of partisanship should not be dismissed (for example, support for an interest group or cause that is not attached to a particular political party).^{Footnote 1}”