Amid the current hysteria regarding MPs’ expenses, I am more than a little bemused by the underlying assumption of many that if the expenses system is cleaned up it will have to be at the price of increasing MPs’ basic salaries.

Why is it so commonly thought that our MPs are poorly paid?

The salary of an ordinary backbench MP is £64,766 and, one should note, the House of Commons is only in operation for 36 weeks of the year.

This salary is three times our national average and means that our MPs are second only to Italian politicians as the highest paid in Europe.

Leaving aside what we can now see is an extremely flexible and generous expenses system, our MPs also enjoy one of the best pension schemes offered to any group of workers and only have to serve two terms as an MP to qualify.

An entitlement to live off a quarter of their final salary means that many of our MPs will get a pension of more than £15,000 a year. If we do end up compensating them for the loss of their expenses, then the taxpayer will end up carrying the burden of an even greater pension fund in the future.

MPs are always eager to stress their public service ethos as a reason for going into politics, but when their pay and terms of service are discussed then they seek to compare themselves with the captains of trade and industry.

Am I alone in finding this quite odd? We are asked to accept as a given that Hazel Blears, for example, would command a salary even greater than what she currently enjoys as a Cabinet Minister if she worked outside of Parliament. Really? Let’s face it, many of our politicians are no more than party hacks displaying little independent spirit or thought. Would they really be in such demand in the outside world?

It was often said of Tony Blair that he could have earned more as a top London lawyer than he did as our PM, and this is true. But it ignores the fact that the pay-off for PMs and cabinet ministers occurs when they step down from office, and banks and other companies compete to offer them highly paid directorships and positions as consultants in return for their status, contacts and influence.

There is also the lucrative political lecture circuit and memoir market to consider.

Tony’s wealth and property portfolio would not be as big as it is today if he had remained outside politics.

I am not saying that money is what motivates our politicians, but I am arguing that it is misleading to suggest that a career in politics always involves financial sacrifice.

No sensible person wishes to deny MPs a decent salary or travel expenses, but neither should we seek to insulate them from the costs of living that the rest of us have to experience if they are to remain in touch with their constituents. Alan J Fisher, Keeper’s Cottage, Witney Road, Finstock