THE sound of the gnashing of teeth at Westminster has been heard for miles around in the wake of MPs being brought to account over the expenses scandal.

But the case of former minister Tony McNulty underlines why there was such public outrage over a number of MPs abusing the system.

The Harrow MP has been ordered to repay £13,837 of expenses claimed on his “second home”.

This was a second home a mere 11 miles from Parliament, occupied by his parents.

Mr McNulty yesterday apologised unreservedly to his fellow MPs, insisted he had followed the rules, but accepted he should have “had much more care” about how they were perceived.

Indeed he should.

It is, of course, a matter of great public concern that the rules allowed such extravagance in the first place and that erroneous advice was given.

But that is only half the story. Whatever the rules, and whatever the advice, people know when something isn’t right.

And Mr McNulty must surely have known that claiming expenses for a house occupied by his parents, within a short commute of Westminster, was not the way taxpayers’ money should have been spent.

We completely understand the need for MPs, such as those representing this region, to have comfortable accommodation in London.

But why shouldn’t MPs who live within a short distance of Parliament do what millions of others do – travel into work?

Mr McNulty says he will have “some difficulty” in repaying the money.

Tough.