I WOULD suggest editor Ian Murray does a little more research before entering into this very debatable area (‘MPs worth more than this’, End of the Week, July 12).

Compared with most other countries, we currently have more MPs, therefore a comparison cannot really be made on their salary to job requirement.

Our MPs could easily be reduced by 200, starting with the countries that have their own Parliaments, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.

By reducing the MPs, the civil servants that look after them would also be reduced.

What a cost saving that would be!

To qualify for a pension, they should have to be in Parliament for the same length of time as the general public have to work to qualify for a pension.

The resettlement payment for losing their seat or retirement should be zero, the same as any member of the general public who lose their job or retire.

All expenses should be capped.

They should also stop suggesting stopping bus passes, winter fuel allowance and TV licences for over 75s.

Mainly because people may start thinking that this money added to the low pay increase in the public sector and the cut backs are purely to fund their lifestyle.

Also, publish the salaries and names of each member of the IPSA and a total cost.

Now, in my opinion, the nation can start to debate whether our MPs deserve a salary increase of one per cent, not the ridiculous figure that is being suggested. High salaries do not always mean better people doing the job.

What it would mean without careful scrutiny is the wrong people doing the job for the wrong reasons.

Also all these highly paid ministers did not do a very good job looking after the economy or immigration in our country.

In my opinion real people would be striving to look after everyone in the area they represent, irrespective of who they voted for, and representing the country to the best of their ability.

Salary should be the last thing they should consider if they truly want the honour of being an MP.

Unfortunately there are clearly a few who were reputedly in the job to line their own pockets.

As a comparison ask any nurse why they chose their career path. It certainly would not be for the money.

In future Ian Murray, please try to put together a balanced opinion as I believe that journalists should never try slanting an opinion one way or the other.

MDG, address supplied.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Very interesting, MDG, but my opinions appeared on an opinion page and as such can be as outfield as the next person’s.

Ironically, and for those who missed my opinion piece (you can still read it on my editor’s blog), I actually agreed with almost all of the points you are making here.