The Times this morning has reported that up to 325 MPs will be replaced in the run up to a General Election this year (or next), with up to 90 being voted out and perhaps 230 resigning. That's some good maths, Rupert.

How many ever should choose to go with dignity, or go with democracy- the question must be raised, "Just how many MPs do we need?" The US House of Representatives administers a population six times that of the United Kingdom, with just 435 members. We have 646. Many may argue that this is possible due to the powers that local authorities in the US have, and that's another argument. Safe to say that it works, though- and a more "Direct Democracy" would go a long way in our fair country.

Hannan and Carswell illustrate in the The Plan how an enlarged Commons only serves to shaft the taxpayer, as this bloats the executive with too many portfolios, unnecessary legislation and MPs clutching at straws to justify their salaries.

"As long as most MPs want to be ministers, Parliament will be a creature of the majority Whips, and will fail in it's chief function, namely to hold the government to account... We should create more opportunities for parliamentary advancement, so that it again becomes possible to have an honourable career as a parliamentarian without aspiring to ministerial office."