THE amount of expenses claimed by politicians is always a highly sensitive subject.

And because politicians are not generally held in high public esteem, there is a natural tendency to suspect that the highest claimers are automatically the greediest.

It is, of course, right and proper that MPs' expenses are open to public scrutiny. But in terms of telling the full story, they can be just as misleading as school league tables.

Though it may not be a popular view, we subscribe to the "pay peanuts and get monkeys" theory on political remuneration, both at national and local level.

It is why local government is suffering from a lack of quality and why it must be recognised that an MP can be near the top of the expenses league but still give better value for money than an MP near the bottom.

It should not be assumed that an MP is riding the gravy train just because he claims high expenses - just as it should not be assumed that an MP who claims relatively little deserves a pat on the back.

Middlesbrough South and East Cleveland MP Ashok Kumar was last night named as the North-East's most expensive MP for the third year running after claiming £161,049 in expenses.

But Dr Kumar defends himself passionately on the grounds that he is a busy MP who works to keep in touch with his constituents. Ultimately, it is up to them to decide whether he is good value for money.

Our chief concern should not just surround those at the top of the expenses scale, but those who are claiming a lot while doing very little to justify it.

Those MPs know who they are - and so do their constituents.