IN the wake of the firestorm over their expenses, there is more discomfort to come for MPs this week when new rules open them up to greater scrutiny of their “extracurricular” activities.

Those MPs who take on additional private sector work argue, unconvincingly, that it is more about them being better informed about the workings of business, than it is about the money they earn.

But there is undoubted unease among many ordinary voters about how MPs can earn very significant sums for doing little more than lending their names to private companies.

Darlington MP Alan Milburn insists there is no connection between the timing of his announcement to stand down at the next election and the fact that he is one of the biggest earners from “outside jobs”.

He points out that his additional earnings – at least £115,000 from five private companies – have already been in the public domain for a considerable time, are within the rules, and do not take up much of his time.

But the political climate has changed radically since the Daily Telegraph began its “drip, drip, drip” analysis of MPs’ expenses claims.

Westminster has become a very different place.

And the new emphasis on outside jobs is bound to add to the public perception that MPs are feathering their nests.

As part of the very necessary cleansing of Parliament’s reputation, the country must be reassured that MPs are fully focused on working for the people who elected them, and that there are no conflicts of interest in their second, third, fourth or fifth jobs.