Another commented: 'There is a profound and unqualified apology for all of the distress that has been caused and I would not wish there to be any doubt about that whatsoever.'

And a third added: 'It has affected the communities in which we live and serve; it has clearly affected taxpayers; and we are extremely sorry for the turn of events that has brought it about.'

So which three MPs were prepared to speak so hair-shirtedly about the expenses scandal?

Well it wasn't any of our 'honourable' members. These were comments made to the Treasury select committee earlier in the year by former RBS chairman Sir Tom McKillop, his former chief exec Sir Fred Goodwin and Andy Hornby, former chief executive of HBOS.

But in themselves - and you're probably ahead of me here - the words don't sound so dissimilar to the apologies issued in recent days by messrs Brown, Cameron and Clegg.

It was no wonder the front page of City AM screamed earlier in the week: 'Don't lecture us, says City.'

And therein lies a big problem for the Brown government and Cameron's government in waiting.

The problem of overclaimed expenses - and all the attendant disingenuousness, messenger-shooting and general stench - weakens politicians' hands in all sorts of ways.

When an MP is called upon to condemn perceived City greed in the future will his or her words ring that bit more hollow? When a minister urges public sector workers to accept a depressed pay claim because of the tough financial climate, will it invite allegations of hypocrisy?

Of course it will.

I won't comment on the claims themselves, some of which appear to me completely reasonable while others simply beggar belief. (It's the extremes of the latter that have seen the former questioned). But just as public confidence in the financial system has been fundamentally dented, so it has in politics.

Governance failures, audit failures (internal at least) and ethical failures stretch from Westminster to the Square Mile.

Recovering from this position is a priority for both the City and the Commons. To do so the banking and political classes will have to learn from the other's mistakes. And they may have to work together in ways they never expected.

It's not turning into a vintage year is it?

I do like to believe this one from Accountancy Age's is genuine. But perhaps I'm wrong.

Paul Windsor of Wimbledon-based firm WSM is in Cannes for the annual property industry jamboree, Mipim.

Rather than blog, I thought the briefer, more immediate posts that Twitter demands might be more approriate. See what you think here.

I would agree. Lehmans is the biggest and most complicated administration the world has ever seen, while dismantling as iconic a brand of Woolies has brought considrable attention to Kahn.

Last week he was also involved in the administration of Mosaic - the fashion retail group that comprises Oasis, Warehouse, Karen Millen and Principles among others - and the use of a pre-pack saw all but Principles and The Shoe Studio sold to managament.

Here at Accountancy Age we're delighted to have persuaded Lomas and Kahn to share a stage at later this month at the London Stock Exchange. Both are appearing at a special breakfast briefing on 27 March.

Forgive the plug: but to reserve your place click here.

On the face of it, it would seem that that line was crossed in the Madoff and Stanford cases (whose auditors the relatively tiny firms of Frieling and Horowitz and CAS Hewlett respectively). But where should the line be?

Martin's asked for coomments - feel free to leave them here too.

Having delivered the new Wembley Stadium and run much of the show since chief executive Brian Barwick left the building last year, Horne must have made the decision to go with an outsider an extremely difficult one.

That outsider is Ian Watmore, a name that cropped on none of the speculative shortlists drawn up by countless sports writers.

Most recently Watmore headed the prime minister's delivery unit; before that he was the government's IT tsar.

But it was in his prior role at Accenture that I bumped into him.

Watmore, an Arsenal fan, was head of Andersen Consulting UK when it split acrimoniously with the accountancy side of the business (so he knows about infighting - and that experience will serve him well as the FA with its unwieldy board structures).

And he's no slouch in the presentation stakes either - I remember he even managed to put a positive spin on Accenture's national insurance recording system contract - one of the most controversial of any government partnership with the private sector.

And his spell at the heart of government will have given him political nous. That will be an invaluable skill as he attempts to balance the competing demands that the job brings.

One of his predecessors as FA chief executive, Mark Palios, once told me he would never forget his first day on the job. He was greeted by thousands of letters, emails and messages from people that ranged from schoolchildren to pensioners offering him advice on what he should be getting on with.

What other job brings that?

It accused - and forgive me if I stick to the wording of an agreed statement between the two parties - the supermarket of creating an elaborate off-shore corporate structure to avoid paying up to £1bn in UK corporation tax on profits from the sale of its UK properties, and that it had already successfully avoided corporation tax on the £500m profit it made from its first two property sales.

Headlines included 'Tesco's £1bn tax avoiding plan - move to the Cayman Islands' and 'Every little bit helps: tax free pot of gold at end of Tesco's rainbow'. After a protracted dispute, a thorough apology and retraction was issued ('We now accept that these damaging allegations were unfounded and should not have been published'.... 'We accept that Tesco was not hypocritical' etc).

The paper did of course also agree to pay a sum by way of damages to a charity of Tesco's choice and a payment by way of costs.

And now details of those costs have emerged. Speaking at a journalists' conference yesterday, Guardian editor Alan Rusbridger revealed that Cater Ruck - engaged by Tesco in the action - had issued the paper with a costs bill of £804,000, running to 56 pages.

According to Press Gazette magazine, Rusbridger said that 'the £804,000 figure "bears no relation at all to the damages claimed" and, pointing to the bill, he said: "To read this document you would weep for the cause of freedom of expression in this country".'

As an editor I winced.

HMRC reported that the number of taxpayers filing returns online leaped 53% this year. It amounted, said the taxman, to half a million more than it expected - with 5.8m taxpayers filing online by deadline this year.

During the peak period - between 4pm and 5pm on 30 January - HMRC's system received 37,500 online returns, the equivalent of ten every second.

And here at Accountancy Age we've heard very few systems complaints which is encouraging and indicates a better performance than last year.

(The main problem pointed out to us was the unwillingness of HMRC's Euston Tower office to accept cheques in person last weekend).

Contrast this with the situation in the US, where the Internal Revenue Service has reported a near 10% drop in e-filing from tax professionals.

In fairness more individual taxpayers are taking advantage of free software to file themselves which may account for the drop.

But on this evidence at least it seems the UK is embracing online tax filing more enthusiastically than the US.

I'm not claiming to be an economist. Nor have I any empirical evidence to use as ammunition to shoot down the Federation of Small Businesses' argument. And it's clear that some sectors of the economy will have been very badly hit - including many FSB members.

I walked past many shuttered retailers on the way home yesterday who needed a day of lost custom like a hold in the head. (Interestingly this didn't apply to dry cleaners, all of which appeared to have opened by 8am.)

But I think technology and culture have changed the notion of 'downtime' in the UK. And for many yesterday will have been about combining remote working with the odd spell of snowman building. Note that the latter would have replaced time normally lost to commuting.

For some it would have been an opportunity to skive, but I sincerely doubt that was the case for the majority - particularly in the professional services industry.

And if 6.4 million - or 20% of the UK working population - were unable to travel to work, I believe many would have been connected by broadband (56% of UK homes now are) to their colleagues and their clients.

At Accountancy Age some of us made it into our central London office - those who didn't were talking to contacts who were also often working from home.

As someone who does work from home from time to time (and often to more productive effect), I do find it dispiriting when a day like yesterday is assumed to be one of lost productivity.

Instead we should learn lessons (perhaps from accountancy firms which have been successful in this regard) and apply technology-led solutions (perhaps Lord Carter's review will deliver more in this regard than it initially suggested) that enable more people to work away at home next time around.

That wouldn't eliminate all lost productivity but it would be a lot cheaper than equipping every London bus with a snowplough for a once-in-20-years event.

It identified ten key questions they should be asking themselves (and provides answers of the ICAS website). They include:

• Is your risk management process getting to the 'real risks'?
• Are funding sources in place and sufficient to meet your cash needs?
• Forecasting is essential but are you sure yours is realistic and current?
• Will your business model work in the short to medium term?
• What would you do if your business were to get into serious difficulties?
  

P&M is a sizeable firm in its own right - it's the 12th largest in the US. But it's good to see a relative minnow outswimming much bigger fish.

The firm believes it has a secret.

'We strive to be 100% jerk-free,' says managing partner Bill Hermann.

Whether KPMG et al continue to be considered jerk-free by employees after various redundancy, reduced hours and part-pay options are pursued remains to be seen.

'A 1.5% fall in GDP is hardly a surprise in the context of a non functioning banking system. However, contrary to popular reports, the UK is not bankrupt.'

'Whatever people may try to tell you, the government measures to deal with the banking crisis are sensible. Maybe it's not going to get any better for a while, but at least it probably won't get any worse.'

Or maybe I'm being harsh?

But there are drawbacks.

One national newspaper which recently offered journalists a similar scheme had very few takers. And why? Well, I gather there was a widespread fear that anyone coming forward would be seen as saying that theirs was a job that could be done in four days and that the change would become permanent.

With chargeable time perhaps the most significant difference between accountancy and (staff) journalism, that might not be a factor.

However I can well imagine a fear among many KPMGers that seeking to take up a four-day week (or indeed the firm's offer of a sabbatical) will be seen as a signal that your heart really isn't in the job and that you aren't partner (or promotion) material.