MPs' Expenses: career consequentials

When the anger over MPs’ expenses has subsided, what will the consequences be for those MPs who have had their claims revealed? For those who are former ministers, preferment is no longer a concern. The only verdict they must fear is that of their association or constituency party if they are seeking re-selection, and their constituents if they are allowed by the leadership to contest their seat next year. But look at some of the cases identified in today’s Telegraph, and ask yourself where they stand now:

James Arbuthnot, a former defence minister, has established himself as an effective and respected chairman of the Commons Defence Select Committee. There has been much whispering of late (some of it admittedly by optimists in the MoD) that he will be brought in by David Cameron to replace Dr Liam Fox as would-be Defence Secretary.

David Davis has made a name as a free-thinking advocate of civil liberties who ejected himself out of a safe-bet for a Cabinet job to pursue his interests from the backbenches. Some saw in his quixotic campaign the beginnings of a tilt at the Speakership.

Stewart Jackson has only just arrived and must have had dreams of making a name for himself in time to catch the eye of the leadership when the Tories return to power.

Sir Alan Haselhurst has long been the “if only…” favourite of those Members who can’t bear seeing Michael Martin in the chair. The Deputy Speaker exudes the no-nonsense seriousness of a prep school headmaster, who deploys modesty and humour when needed with great effect. Some looked to him to replace Mr Martin and restore order to a rudderless House.

I mention these to underscore the point, one that could just as easily be made with some of the Labour examples, that this sorry business affects not just those who – frankly – always had a bit of a political smell about them. It touches also those who have over years built up justified reputations as thoughtful, effective parliamentarians who contribute to public life. This is why this affair poses such a threat to Parliament: justified public anger risks sweeping away not just the useless stinkers but also the useful ones.