The antiquated House of Commons expenses system has recently and rightly come under scrutiny and now faces reform, but there appears to be confusion among recent correspondents (March 20 and 25).

John Haran refers to MPs' allowances, but fails to mention the vast majority is spent on staff salaries and office running costs.

As for the cost of running a second home incurred by being an MP, public provision only goes part of the way towards this, which explains why many MPs claim the full amount - hence the same £20,902 figure. This has to cover bills and council tax as well as mortgage interest repayments.

I have never voted on my salary arrangements, believing that MPs should not determine these matters. I have never claimed for furniture at the public expense and have always submitted receipts for my expenses, as required and approved by the Commons authorities.

Those who insinuate wrongdoing should either provide evidence of "fiddling" or else reserve their opinion. The debate on MP's pay is long overdue, but misinformation serves only to increase cynicism and disinterest in politics.

John Baron
MP for Billericay and district

...When pensioners are sent to prison because they cannot afford to pay the unjust council tax, but a Prime Minister earning over £120,000 a year plus allowances can legally get the taxpayers to pay for a television licence in his second home, then there is something rotten in our land.

Politicians live in another world where they believe they are of more value to the nation than ordinary honest hard working people who pay their own way in life.

If the sickening catalogue of items for which MPs can claim is really justified on the basis they need to maintain a second home, there is still no excuse for not meeting many of those expenses out of their own inflated salaries.

S Askham
Elmsleigh Drive
Leigh