So Becks's boyhood house didn't sell.

It's not that surprising, when you think about it - and maybe not that surprising even if you don't think about it. The house is a fairly typical three-bedroom terraced affair in Leytonstone, not much to look at from the outside and what's more, Beckham only lived there until he was two. One would imagine, therefore, that "brand Beckham" wouldn't have much of an impact on its price.

Not so, claims the agent acting on behalf of the owners, who maintains he can sell it for upwards of £750,000. This is down from the rather grander estimate of £1million and down again from the original £850,000 the house was listed for, but it's still more than three times its market value. You have to admire the man's optimism, I suppose, and his tenacity for clinging to said optimism. How long this will last is anyone's guess.

In other news, we've got a local MP embroiled in the Telegraph's huge expenses exposé. Leyton and Wanstead member Harry Cohen is reported to have engaged in a practice known as "flipping", whereby he spent thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money redecorating a "second home" before selling it and then claiming £12,000 in stamp duty and fees on a new house. He's also alleged to have claimed money for baby wipes and shaving oil, which he is apparently planning to pay back. How nice.

The part I don't quite understand about all this is how all these MPs have managed to get away with these practices for so long, if the Telegraph is to be believed. The whole thing smacks of an inherently flawed system in which people who should a) be more responsible and b) be fully accountable for their actions are allowed, at a very basic level, to pull the wool over the public's eyes.

There is, of course, the old adage that politicians are bound to philander but why does this have to be a foregone conclusion? Is it simply a matter of power corrupting people or is that the people who want to become powerful are already prone to such behaviour?

Everyone is fallible - there's no denying that - and the scandal of the situation is no doubt magnified by the fact that it's taking place in a very public way. However, one would have thought, if anything, that those in public office ought to be less likely to act dishonestly. We trust them to represent us and with that trust comes certain expectations.

Or maybe I've been too oblivious to politics for too long and I'm being far too naive.

This is perhaps an over-simplification of the matter - I sincerely doubt every single MP has broken or even bent the rules and it would be nonsense to decry Parliament as a whole - but the fact that so many have is not only a searing indictment of those people involved or even of the expenses system, but of the electorate itself and where it chooses to place its trust.