Article content continued

I think we have some of the elements of a James Bond movie

But in the particular instance before us, it was neither the glamour factor nor even the family connections that made the stir. It was that ride on the private helicopter. Should Mr. Trudeau have accepted the transport hospitality? In his position, was he allowed to do so?

After some press, and more opposition prodding, the affair was duly set under the Argus-eyed scrutiny of Ms. Dawson, as a matter worthy of her ethical declension. The questions were basic and limited, and, as far as we know, mainly confined to the PM’s use of the Aga Khan’s helicopter. Was that use proper? Were the rules violated? If so, how serious was the violation? Did it entail penalty?

A single trip, one helicopter, a family friend’s island—this is not an intricate affair. Yet, it has been since just after Christmas of last year that Ms. Dawson began the investigation, and the investigation still goes on. A year on and no questions answered. Even as Ms. Dawson finished her term and a new commissioner prepares to take up the trail.

A trip, one helicopter, an island. This is not an intricate affair

What is the point of this commissioner if, on a matter so limited, so absent any features of complexity, or even abstraction, that a full year passes and “the matter is still under investigation.” This is not the Warren Commission, or even the great comedy of the inquiry into Trump-Russia collusion.

We may summarize the mandate: helicopter—it was alright to use; or helicopter—it was not alright to use. A telephone, an internet search or two, and an office assistant to make the call, and it should be done with in an afternoon.