It does no harm whatsoever. In fact, I would suggest and argue that it would comfort Canadians that, yes, he has, that an investigation is going to get to the bottom of this. If the Prime Minister has done nothing wrong, as he continually states, then just say so. You're not going to be breaching any confidence of the Ethics Commissioner by saying whether or not you have met with her. If in fact the RCM Police were the ones telling the Prime Minister that for security reasons they believed he must take this private method of transportation, because otherwise security protocols would be breached, that's fine.
I believe, then, that the natural course of action to take from now—I'm sure the NDP have felt the same way—is for members of the opposition to simply write a letter to the commissioner of the RCM Police and ask whether they could provide documentation that demonstrates that they had advised the Prime Minister to take that private helicopter. I don't believe that any security provisions would be breached by the RCMP admitting to either advising the Prime Minister thusly or not, if it's standard protocol.
We all know, for example, that prime ministers are required to take secure aircraft when travelling. They are prevented from taking commercial airlines. We know that. Why do we know that? It's because the RCMP has admitted it. I'm sure the RCMP, if asked, would respond by telling us exactly what they advised the Prime Minister. Or was it a fact that the Prime Minister determined himself that he would take this private helicopter and simply advise the RCMP of his course of action? We need to know that. Why? It's not to begrudge the Prime Minister his taking a private vacation, which he is certainly entitled to do. But now we want to know whether the Prime Minister misled Parliament and misled Canadians. He has stated on the record that it was because the RCMP advised him for security reasons to take this private aircraft. If it's true, then the Prime Minister should have no difficulty in proving it, but if it is not true, then Canadians will be rightfully outraged. Parliamentarians will have more than just a simple case of privilege. We will have much more than that. We will have a documented case in which the Prime Minister deliberately misled Parliament.
I know that the term “deliberately misled” is not considered parliamentary language in the House of Commons, but if in fact the Prime Minister did not receive instructions or advice from the RCMP that he must take, in their opinion, a private aircraft, that is a serious breach of privilege—