Lord Archer's fighting attempts to keep himself in the race for Mayor of London appeared to have backfired yesterday. It was confirmed that Conservative Party chiefs have decided he should first be the subject of an investigation by their new ethics and integrity committee.
The millionaire novelist and one-time party vice-chairman will doubtless feel there is little justice in the world of politics.
New Labour's problems with sleaze have resurfaced - with two Foreign Office ministers again under pressure over who knew what and when about the arms-to-Africa affair, and Paymaster General Geoffrey Robinson accused of breaking parliamentary rules over property interests in Tuscany.
But the London Times yesterday splashed instead on the "quiver full of issues" dogging his candidacy for the Conservative nomination for a job which does not yet exist, in an election still some two years or more away.
Just 24 hours after his rigorous defence against a battery of familiar charges - ranging from his father's war record and the alleged invention of his own academic record to his role in assisting fellow councillors with their expenses claims and the question of dealing in Anglia TV shares - the Evening Standard concluded yesterday that Lord Archer had begged still more questions about his suitability to be the Tory party's standard-bearer.
Lord Archer complains bitterly that he is the victim of a vendetta and that Londoners, in his experience, want to know what he would do about pollution and about the capital's chronic transport problems. On Tuesday night he set out to rebuff charges previously levelled at him by the campaigning journalist, Paul Foot, in the Standard under the headline: "Why this man is unfit to be Mayor."
By disposing of "the trivialities" he said he hoped the debate about London's future could move onto a more serious plane.
Among the `trivia', Lord Archer acknowledged that he did not pass any A-levels while insisting he had not told Oxford University that he had. He had claimed in 1969 to be the youngest elected MP, at 29, but now realised this was a mistake and that that prize belonged to Ms Bernadette McAliskey (nee Devlin).
Yes, he thought he was the youngest GLC councillor in 1967, and "It's news to me that I was not." He never claimed his father had won the Distinguished Conduct Medal until the DCM League mistakenly informed him that he had.
He did help some councillors with their expenses forms although there was nothing illegal in that, and anyway the sums involved would have been minuscule. He had been stopped in a Toronto store, carrying two suits over his shoulder while looking for the shirt department, but was not arrested or charged and admitted to no theft since none took place.
He would not revisit the question of Monica Coghlan save to observe that he won libel damages of £500,000 which he gave to charity. He emphatically did not receive insider information from his wife, Mary, prior to the Anglia share deal; the matter was investigated thoroughly by the DTI inspectors and he had not been charged.
"Heaven knows," declared Lord Archer, "I made mistakes in my life. I am neither genius nor saint. But perhaps future profiles might mention that over recent years I have raised more than £50 million for charity, never once claiming even my expenses."
Lord Archer went on: "No one would be suitable for London who has not made mistakes. If there is anyone who is perfect out there, they should apply for the job."
But the search for somebody a little closer to perfection seems set to continue. Last night Lord Archer's unofficial biographer, Michael Crick, said the peer's replies raised further questions - as to how the false information about those A-levels found its way into the archives of both Dover College and Oxford University; why he had previously denied helping councillors with their expenses claims (and at a 10 per cent commission rate); and, "Why was he dealing in Anglia shares on behalf of his friend Brooks Saib when Saib was perfectly used to buying his own shares through his own stockbroker?"
The request for referral of Lord Archer's candidacy to an inquiry by the new ethics and integrity committee was formally made last weekend by former MP Sir Timothy Kitson. He and other senior Tories fear that the London contest could be dominated by questions about Lord Archer rather than questions of policy, in what will be the nearest thing in Britain to a US-style presidential election.
In preparing himself for the job, Lord Archer has drawn much from the American experience. It will be ironic if it is American-style practice and scrutiny which denies him the glittering prize.