Shut the gate and get the truth before the ute bolts

IF PRIME Minister Kevin Rudd is seriously concerned about the dignity of the political process, he should endorse Opposition Leader Malcolm Turnbull's call for a judicial inquiry into Utegate.

Conducting the nation's business through leaks and door-stop interviews is unacceptable. It's as ridiculous as having Labor ministers such as Anthony Albanese talk about proper parliamentary behaviour. Much of the media has already decided Turnbull has the most to lose from this affair but no one will really know unless all the gossip that has flooded the blogosphere over the past week is chased down. Australia should be given the opportunity to determine what has occurred in this matter. A lot of questions need answering. The most obvious is whether Treasurer Wayne Swan misled Parliament about his relationship with car dealer John Grant. From that flow all the other questions. What is the exact relationship between Rudd and Grant? Why did the wealthiest prime minister in Australian history need a free ute? Why did Swan brief only one car dealer in the country, John Grant, about his request for assistance? Why did the Treasurer's staff bring Grant's plight to the notice of officials dealing with the OzCar scheme when (a) it had not even been approved and (b) it did not cover individual dealers such as Grant? Why did Treasury officials bring Grant's situation to the attention of Ford Credit executives seeking $500 million? Why did Treasury officials give those executives Grant's mobile number? Let's have IT experts tell us how Rudd knew that that one email was a fake and explain why that particular email could not be found by the Government's experts last week, though AFP experts this week found that it had been generated within Treasury. The behaviour of the AFP also needs some explanation. Why has the AFP offered a running commentary on its investigation into the faked email when it normally maintains a communication blackout during inquiries? Was it placed under any political pressure? Trust depends on openness and transparency. Was the muzzling of a public servant last week contempt of Parliament? What safeguards can be installed to ensure that witnesses appearing before parliamentary committees are never again harassed and bullied into silence? The fake email deserves special attention. Who composed it? Was it an in-house prank ginned up by bored Treasury officers to embarrass colleague Godwin Grech? Rudd has implied the Opposition was complicit in its creation. What does he know about its genesis? Someone knows whether it was designed to smear the PM or undercut the Opposition's attack. Expose them. Any inquiry into this affair will need the power to compel evidence but that is a small price to pay for the restoration of confidence and dignity in the political process. In the world beyond the ACT this fiasco underscores the detachment of the political and media classes from the electorate. An absurd amount of time has been given to this matter, the Government has the opportunity to put an end to the speculation. It may be impossible to inoculate MPs against mid-winter madness but it should not be beyond the capacity of the Government to address this lapse in parliamentary practices.