A recent vacation to Jamaica by Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has escaped scrutiny, as the federal ethics watchdog has ruled against carrying out an investigation into the matter.

The ruling comes despite calls from opposition parties, who say “lavish” trips should not be gifted, even if they are from friends. In making the announcement, Konrad von Finkenstein, interim ethics committee chairman, told the House of Commons Ethics Committee meeting on Tuesday (January 30) that he considers the case closed.

Under the Conflict of Interest Act, von Finkenstein can’t publicly disclose conversations he had with the prime minister, but he said that Trudeau’s stay at the Prospect Estate and Villas in St Mary was acceptable because it came from a friend with whom he has a “true depth of friendship.”

Trip deemed acceptable

He argued that, “if Trudeau’s trip was unacceptable, it would’ve been recorded on his office’s website — and nothing is there.” Trudeau’s office said earlier this month that the family’s stay was offered at no cost, after previously stating that the family would be covering the cost of their accommodation.

The Conflict of Interest Act allows politicians to accept gifts and other advantages only from relatives or family friends with whom they have a well-documented close bond. Trudeau ran afoul of that rule when he was a guest of the Aga Khan in late 2016.

While the act does not offer a limit on the value of such gifts, von Finkenstein does have the purview to investigate gifts from friends in exceptional circumstances — like if a politician was gifted a $1-million Ferrari.

According to the interim ethics committee chair, “If it was an absolute extraordinary gift, like a million-dollar car, I can always, if I want to, say, ‘This is so unusual I have trouble accepting that you’re good friends that you give each other one million dollar gifts.”  

Conclusively, von Finkenstein doesn’t view Trudeau’s Jamaica vacation as meeting that threshold.

Opposition parties insistent on an investigation 

However, Opposition parties are arguing an investigation should be launched, although no formal complaints have been lodged. For his part, Conservative ethics critic Michael Barrett said it is not reasonable for a prime minister to accept what he called an extravagant gift at a “luxury villa.” 

Member of Parliament Matthew Green described the trip as “lavish,” arguing that more reforms are needed within the Conflict of Interest Act. 

“It shows the loopholes, and (von Finkenstein’s) testimony today was that he was simply following the act,” Green said adding, “any commissioner we put into that position is only going to continue to interpret the act as it’s written, and it’s our responsibility as a committee to come up with better legislation.”