Duck houses, £2,000 televisions, moat cleaning – the additional cost allowance (ACA) has cost the taxpayer hundreds of thousands of pounds and several MPs their jobs, but it just may prove to be the trigger for widespread governmental reform that progressives have long argued for.

Let’s not focus on the minutiae of who claimed what, and think instead of the wider consequences of this crisis. We must recognise that this ugly episode is but a symptom of a more fundamental failure of governance in the UK, and at the same time represents a glorious opportunity to reform an electoral system rotting from its very core.

So while it is a scandal that Sir Peter Viggers claimed over £1,600 for a duck shelter or that Shahid Malik MP rents a house at a fraction of market cost, many within our party and outwith will be quietly pleased that a sub-set of Parliamentarians have presented reformers with a near-perfect storm: public disaffection with a government coupled with visceral anger at the wider political economy.

To put it bluntly, the ‘Malik defence’ (also known as, and I paraphrase, “I didn’t break any rules so technically I did nothing wrong”) and the ‘Kirkbride defence’ (aka “it never crossed my mind that I was in the wrong until the press exposed my faux pas”) simply won’t wash. The public is hungry for more, much more.

This is the message that Nick Clegg has so eloquently sets out in his Guardian article laced with both fury at Westminster’s myriad failings and optimism at the transformed political landscape before us. The early debate over a response to the exposure of MPs’ conduct largely revolved around how to stop future abuses of the expenses system, perhaps a whisper or two about a snap election to purge the corrupt and refresh the Commons.

Indeed, David Cameron set out his vision for change this week, in what is rapidly becoming a stirring forum on the future direction of British politics, as part of The Guardian’s New Politics debate. But take a closer look at what Cameron wrote, and note what he missed out – his attempt to cast himself as a great reformer, as the saviour of government at a time of undeniable crisis, falls short of what is required.