Here are the first couple of paragraphs of the Letters Patent that appoint The Honourable John Dyson Heydon AC QC as a Royal Commission of Inquiry.

Note that he is a Commission of inquiry.   He is required to inquire into the matters set out in the Letters Patent.  

If an early and perfunctory inquiry is later contradicted by sound documentary evidence, the Commission should politely say so and continue to inquire - to get to the truth.   In the case of the Dawesville Channel contract, Senior Counsel Assisting the Commission appears prepared to accept the sketchy recollection of Ralph Blewitt, who says there was a tender process.   Senior Counsel Assisting makes the observation that documents referred to by me (that establish there was no tender process) are not in evidence before the Commission. 

All of that goes to prove that the Commission's Inquiry has been insufficient.

There should be no blame or hurt pride in admission of the bleeding obvious.  But damage could emerge if the Commission was assisted by its Senior Counsel to accept wholly inadequate evidence as accurately describing central facts.

I hope the Commission resolves to inquire further.