While I agree, as an “angry member of the public”, with John Clark’s overall comments re MPs and their expenses, I find his conclusions/recommendations to be playing to the baying mob and unworthy of an elected Liberal Democrat.

Having defined their income as £64,000 a year, he goes on to say that “all people on less than £100,000 are in an inferior class to our MP political class”. There’s something wrong with his numbers here.

When MPs travel between their constituencies and London, it seems not unreasonable for them to travel first class.

The second homes issue has clearly been the subject of abuse, (which needs to be addressed), but suggesting that MPs with families should be housed in blocks of flats in London is really not an option.

The suggestion that MPs be paid the national minimum wage is farcical. Statistically, that figure is biased by a vast majority in low/medium pay positions, and no guide to what to pay for the range of skills/experience we require in an MP.

I have no difficulty in accepting MPs doing other work. Arguably, involvement in such work keeps them involved in the real world, instead of cocooned in the Palace of Westminster.

For secretaries and researchers to be employed by the state would lead to conflicting loyalties.

By all means, let’s debate how to clean up the current mess, but please spare us the rabble-rousing.

John Collins, Malton