THAT’S outrageous” claimed a North-West MP.

“You say that I’ve not been to a meeting for a long time. I was here very recently – nine months ago”.

This happened in 1978. There were some MPs who thought they had better things to occupy their time, including second, full-time, jobs in the City or at the Bar. They got away with it, too.

The journalists who could have been blowing the whistle on this were part of a freemasonry – “the Lobby”. In return for privileged access to MPs and Ministers, they generally kept quiet. A 1960s satirical TV programme caused amazement when it disclosed that there were “12 silent men” who throughout that Parliament had never said a single thing on their constituents’ behalf.

How things have changed.

Now virtually everything that an MP says or does is available for scrutiny. Web sites like “TheyWorkForYou” chart every MPs interventions. We are bombarded with campaigning emails, from badger culls to the recognition of Palestine.

MPs now work much harder than they ever did; yet MPs are held in lower esteem than 40 years ago.

One reason for that is the immensely damaging effect of the 2009 expenses’ scandal. One reform proposed in consequence was that, between elections, voters should have the right to recall their MP – to put them to a further ballot.

At long last there’s a Bill before the House this week.

It received an unopposed Second Reading (in-principle agreement) this week.

It does not however go far enough. It provides for recall only where an MP receives a prison sentence or is suspended from the Commons for 21 days or more.

There’s an all-party amendment, which I’ll be backing, to go further. This would force a by-election where 20 per cent of voters in a constituency required it.

If it becomes law it won’t be used that often. But it will keep MPs on their toes. And if it had been around 40 years ago it would have flushed out those who did treat their voters with contempt.