WE NEED fewer MPs, the received wisdom states. David Cameron has suggested that the Commons needs to be reduced by the suspiciously round number of ten per cent. Sir John Baker, former head of the Senior Salaries Review Board, was last week hoping that his call for the number of MPs to be cut by about a third would mitigate his crime of calling for a big payrise for those remaining.

Now today the unpleasant Minette Marin at the Sunday Times is sneering her way through yet another article demanding that the number of MPs is reduced.

To sum up the arguments currently in vogue: everyone hates MPs, so there should be fewer of them. And that’s it.

There may well be arguments in favour of reducing the size of the Commons, but if “we don’t like the ones already there” is the best you can do, then we should just get used to the existing number.

What about actually looking at an MP’s job before deciding we don’t need the current number? How many Statutory Instrument (secondary legislation) committees are held each day the Commons is sitting? How many standing committees, grand committees, select committees?

In constituencies, are electors complaining that MPs hold too many surgeries, or too few? Do they complain about seeing too much of their representatives or too little?

By all means examine the way the Commons operates and decide how many MPs are needed to make it function effectively. But to claim there should be fewer of us because we’re unpopular makes about as much sense as claiming that an appropriate response to the expenses scandal is to introduce proportional representation.

“We have to many politicians!” is the cry. “Look at the American House of Reprsentatives – 435 members representing a population of 250 million.”

Well, yes, but have you seen the staffing numbers for each Congressman? Have you seen how much it costs to run state-level legislatures and state senators’ offices?

If the aim of a reduction is to reduce the cost of politics, think again: fewer MPs means fewer – and bigger – constituencies. Bigger constituencies mean bigger workloads and increased staffing and administrative budgets for MPs.