WITH reference to our MPs’ comments in the Guardian, I suspect most of the electorate do not have a problem with legitimate expenses claims.

The anger comes from obscene claims for such essentials as duck houses, moat cleaning, phantom mortgages et, and from blatant profiteering from expenses or using them as a revenue stream.

There are still two ways our MPs can gain profit from their second home expenses payments: * If the claims are just for mortgage interest over the length of their time as MPs, the value of the properties may well rise. Effectively these properties, until the time of their sale, have been paid for by taxpayers and are effectively owned by the taxpayer. However any profit that arises at the time of the sale will be pocketed by the relevant MP.

* Likewise, if the expenses payments are being used to pay mortgage interest and capital, then the potential profit at the point of sale for the relevant MP will be even greater.

Is it possible to obtain confirmation from both our MPs that they will not seek to gain financially from the tens of thousands of pounds contributed by taxpayers for their second homes when they are sold, either returning the profit made to the treasury, or paying it to local charities such as St Rocco’s, as well as providing evidence they have done so?

NICK BROUGH Old Hall