According to a recent poll published by the Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, 78% of surveyed Ukrainians believe that the president bears direct responsibility for corruption in the government and regional administrations. Only 18% of respondents disagreed with this statement.
Always follow the money trail. The company who completed the poll has some credibility behind it. It also produces a full financial statement. None of which shows the company is led by bad influences. It even gained 20% of its funding from the British Embassy at one point.
I cannot read the questions asked. They are shown in pictorial format and my translate programme cannot handle that. How you ask the question has a huge sway over the answers given. But since the company has the appearance of due diligence, I would see this as something that the Ukraine government should be looking at as a problem. You never fix a problem if you do not recognise it as such.
The questions are repeated on the lower half of the page (which I only noticed after extracting this from the images…). They seem reasonable. Half of them are about health care it seems. Of course, there’s a whole lot of other text on the page too that provides more details about their methodology.
Чи погоджуєтеся Ви з твердженням, що президент несе пряму
відповідальність за корупцію в уряді, воєнних адміністраціях?
На Вашу думку, чи доречно з боку закордонних партнерів України було б запровадити підхід, за якого військова допомога Україні надавалася б лише
за умови ефективної боротьби з корупцією в Україні?
Чи погоджуєтеся Ви з твердженням, що зараз варто менше публічно критикувати українську владу, навіть якщо є підозри у корупційних зловживаннях певних чиновників, адже це дестабілізує ситуацію в країні та зменшує довіру закордонних партнерів до України?
Які перешкоди, на Вашу думку, зараз існують для підприємницької діяльності
в Україні?
Який субʼєкт, на Вашу думку, у першу чергу зможе здійснити повоєнну
відбудову країни ефективно і без корупції?
Чи доводилося особисто Вам впродовж минулого року відвідувати державну лікарню чи поліклініку? Якщо так, чи доводилося Вам доплачувати за прийом у
лікаря чи за медичну процедуру (укол, перевʼязка, тощо) чи діагностику (рентген,
УЗД тощо)?
Ви поділяєте чи ні думку, що лікарям можна і варто додатково віддячувати,
щоб мати гарантію отримання якісної допомоги в майбутньому?
На Вашу думку, які проблеми системи охорони здоровʼя треба вирішувати в
першу чергу?
From Google translate…
Do you agree with the statement that the president carries a straight line
responsibility for corruption in the government, military administrations?
In your opinion, would it be appropriate for Ukraine’s foreign partners to introduce an approach under which military aid to Ukraine would be provided only
under the condition of effective fight against corruption in Ukraine?
Do you agree with the statement that now it is better to criticize the Ukrainian authorities less publicly, even if there are suspicions of corrupt practices by certain officials, because this destabilizes the situation in the country and reduces the trust of foreign partners in Ukraine?
What obstacles, in your opinion, currently exist for entrepreneurial activity
in Ukraine?
Which subject, in your opinion, will first of all be able to carry out the post-war
reconstruction of the country efficiently and without corruption?
Did you personally visit a state hospital or polyclinic during the past year? If so, did you have to pay extra for admission at
doctor or for a medical procedure (injection, dressing, etc.) or diagnostics (X-ray,
ultrasound, etc.)?
Do you agree or not that doctors can and should be thanked additionally,
to have a guarantee of receiving quality care in the future?
In your opinion, what problems of the health care system should be solved in
first of all?
Thank you very much. No real questions regarding his honesty at all?
This does not say he is responsible for the corruption, as in taking part. It only states that the buck stops with him and him alone. As I said context is everything.
Yeah, given the range of questions and how the article presents the results only referring to 1-2 questions, it makes me feel the article is biased.
I kind of agree. The language used is ambiguous to say the least.