More nasty little stories

And, given that the source of the complaint against Mr Martin to Parliament's standards watchdog was Michael Barnbrook, a retired policeman who is now a member of the British National Party and its candidate for the London mayoralty, there is little doubt from which political direction those "nasty little stories" are coming.

However, be all that as it may, Mr Martin's domestic financial arrangements are now in the spotlight and he will have to account for them.

But it is not only Mr Martin's personal reputation that is at stake here. He is an old parliamentary hand and is perfectly able to defend himself.

What is more important is the reputation of Parliament and, indeed, of politics itself.

With the current rash of stories about members' abuse of their financial perks and privileges, the credibility of MPs, never at a terribly high point, has sunk to a level that parallels used-car salesmen and estate agents in the popular perception.

From the long saga of Peter Mandelson's financial indiscretions, through the sorry yarn of John Prescott's housing tribulations, the sad little tale of the Tory Wintertons' housing finance arrangements, the withdrawal of the Tory whip and suspension of MP Derek Conway because of his payment to his sons supposedly for work done in his office, through the myriad other tales of the relatives of MPs employed at Westminster, the journey is a long, mucky and discreditable one.

And it is one that it would pay MPs to chart quite carefully. They should ask themselves: "Who does all of this benefit?"

Given Mr Barnbrook's involvement, even the dimmest of MPs should be able to answer the question for themselves.

Misconduct, or even the appearance of misconduct, by politicians serves only the anti-democratic forces of reaction and reinforces the disillusion and alienation that large numbers of people feel as regards the political process.

As a result, democracy itself suffers and that damages working peoples' interests more that anyone else's. So Parliament, and especially the Labour Party, is going to have to be extremely careful to clean its own stables very well and very publicly.

And that will not be helped by self-examination by a committee headed by a Speaker now tainted with, admittedly unproven, allegations and staffed by MPs, at least one of whom has a record of resisting the application of the Freedom of Information Act to MPs' financial and business arrangements.

Parliament has some way to go to overcome the stain left by the last prime minister, whose undignified scramble for high-paid employment immediately on leaving office left a bad taste in many mouths.

An open and public inquiry into members' expenses and business arrangements will help, as will the establishment of an external monitoring body to regulate them in future - as well as determining their wages more impartially than MPs have done recently.

But, in the end, Parliament will best be served by the electorate putting into that establishment decent people who are driven more by the public good than by their own personal advantage.