THE ability to walk on egg shells is now an essential skill for all who aspire to the House of Commons.
Humble back bench MPs and ministers alike must work at maintaining spotless images in this age of sleaze-spotting.
This was demonstrated yesterday when the Government was accused of failing to practise the high standards it preached after it was revealed that public health minister Tessa Jowell's husband formerly had links with the Formula One motor racing world.
And on the same day former MP Neil Hamilton was finally censured for serious and persistent breaches of parliamentary conduct.
Both issues leave us with a feeling that Parliament has failed to convince the country that it is capable of self regulation.
The performance of the Standards of Privileges Committee in the Hamilton case was nothing short of a shambles. While it found Mr Hamilton guilty of several breaches of conduct, the committee pointedly refused to take a view on the main allegation of whether Mr Hamilton had received cash payments from Harrods owner Mohamed Fayed.
The outcome was a fudge and calls for major changes in the way future investigations are conducted are wholly justified.
Mr Hamilton and his vociferous wife may not have created a favourable image for
themselves over the last few months, but the former MP deserved better treatment.
The dithering performance of the committee has left a nasty smell in the air which will hang around for some time.
But when we consider the reaction to the revelation that Tessa Jowell's lawyer husband resigned as a non-executive director of a Formula One company after his wife became leader of Labour's anti-smoking drive we are left wondering whether the House's preoccupation with sleaze borders on paranoia.
The facts hardly warrant Lord Nolan's call for an inquiry into the financial interests of the immediate family members of Government ministers. It would be a step too far.
But if you are in Government these days you must examine your life closely for anything that can be construed as sleaze.
Converted for the new archive on 14 July 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article