Sir, In his letter published in last week’s issue of the Border Telegraph Jamie Hindhaugh argues that the pay of MPs should reflect the average pay levels of their constituents if they are to, “stand for the interests of the masses”. I beg to differ.

Part of the job of any elected representative is to represent the views and stand up for the interests of his or her electors; but in order for him or her to understand or represent those interests the person elected does not necessarily have to personally share the circumstances of his or her constituents - he or she may do so but it is not essential.

To be trite, a blonde can and may speak for a brunette (and vice versa).

Another part of the job of an elected representative is to assess the information to which he or she, by virtue of his or her day-to-day involvement in government or opposition, is privy and has the time to study in depth.

Then, having done so and in the light of his or her experience and insight, to judge what policies are really in the best interests of those he or she represents; who, for their part, for lack of time, lack of information, a lack of understanding of the full ramifications of an issue may not be so well placed to judge what is truly in their own interests.

Such a ‘nanny knows best’ attitude can of course be taken too far; but so too can the idea that the representative be no more than a passive agent of his or her electors who contributes nothing in terms of intellect and experience.

An elected representative must therefore not simply ‘reflect’ his or her constituents but must also draw on his or her own personal qualities to decide what actually is in the best interests of these constituents and if the representative is to do so effectively then it is important that he or she is clever, capable and experienced, as well as being in touch with the concerns of those who elected him or her.

Since, in the society in which we live, clever, capable and experienced people are generally able to command higher levels of pay than those who are not.

It is in our own best interests that we pay MPs a wage that is at least within shouting distance of the sort of pay they might expect to receive from a rival employer if we wish to attract the calibre of person who is really capable of looking after our interests.

Pay peanuts, get monkeys. Do we want to be governed by monkeys?

I am, etc.

Neil Stratton Heiton Mains Heiton