THE revelations about MPs expenses will change British politics forever.

The public anger at members’ willingness to exploit a weak system to use taxpayers’ money for their own personal gain should see a number of safe seats turn risky.

An immediate general election may appear to make sense, but there is a danger that it could become dominated by one issue, while other important aspects of policy are lost.

Perhaps the furore, with its relentless tone of disgust at our elected representatives, will prove ultimately good for democracy.

Voters who have exercised their right not to vote out of disdain for the main political parties may have been shaken into action by their outrage and once again engage with the political process.

The prospect of the emergence of a significant band of high profile and influential independents unconstrained by the machinery of mainstream parties could make things very interesting.

But it is important to remember that not all MPs appear to have been in it for what they can get.

The contrast between the Harry Cohen and Neil Gerrard on this issue could not be starker.

While both backbenchers are regarded as being on the left wing of their party and have never been seduced by the New Labour project, their interpretation of the concept of principle are completely out of sync.

Mr Cohen has stubbornly refused to show a hint of regret over his sizable and questionable claims. He has also criticised the Guardian for asking him to justify his actions over a number of years.

Mr Gerrard, on the other hand, has never claimed for a second home and has one of the lowest office running costs of all MPs.

Without criticising Mr Cohen directly, he has stated that it is wrong in principle for MPs to use public money for home improvements.

As Mr Gerrard steps down at the next election, a new kind of principled politics could emerge.

But it remains to be seen whether Mr Cohen’s constituents will see him as the right man to ensure integrity is upheld.