NORTH-East Tories were left red-faced after accusing one of their own MPs of failing to “fight for” his constituents in the Commons.

The leader of North Tyneside Conservative attacked MPs who “short-change” voters by making only a small number of speeches in the chamber.

Councillor Judith Wallace produced a table claiming that such MPs were costing taxpayers many thousands of pounds for each speech they made.

And she said: “Politicians think that they can just turn up at election time, push a few leaflets through the door and think ‘job done’. Well it just isn't good enough.”

However, the table – based on the number of speeches made during the 2014 calendar year – listed only two North-East MPs as “well below average”.

And one of those two was fellow Tory James Wharton, who faces a crucial knife-edge battle to cling onto the Stockton South seat, where he has a majority of just 332.

Mr Wharton spoke just 12 times last year, the Tories said – at an alleged cost of £5,589.17 per contribution - two more occasions than Tynemouth Labour MP Alan Campbell (£6,707).

Cllr Wallace added: “Voters expect their MPs to be working hard for their salary.

“An MP's job is to stand up in the House of Commons and make the views of your electors known to the executive - to challenge and to fight for your constituents.”

Tom Blenkinsop, Labour MP for Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland – second in the table (76 speeches) – pointed out that Mr Campbell was Labour’s deputy chief whip, so spoke very little by convention.

And he said: “I’d like to congratulate the Tory party for highlighting how little James Wharton has done in his five years - and also for highlighting how much I have done.”

Mr Wharton did not return messages left by The Northern Echo, while a spokesman for Cllr Wallace insisted: “Judith's comments are specifically about her sitting MP Alan Campbell, for Tynemouth.”

The list put Hexham Conservative MP Guy Opperman top (116 speeches), with Labour’s Ian Lavery (Wansbeck – 66) and Grahame Morris (Easington – 64) third and fourth.

However, most Westminster observers believe such tables are a poor measure of an MP’s effectiveness – as they ignore constituency work and private lobbying of ministers on key issues.