The idea that 400 MPS is insufficient for the UK is nonsense. The US Congress has 535 members (100 senators and 435 Representatives) for a population of around 325m. That is (roughly) one for every 600,000 people. By contrast, even leaving aside the ridiculously bloated (and seemingly ever-increasing) House of Lords, the UK has 650 MPs for around 65m people – one for every 100,000. But with a people:reprentatives ratio of six times smaller I don’t recall ever hearing that the US suffers from a lack of representation.
There is no need for so many MPs especially as for the past 40 years for many issues they have been simply riding on the coat tails of the EU, rubber stamping its edicts into UK law. The UK has far too many layers of government and administration and I completely agree with 3Ts idea of abolishing all but central government. A reduced House of Commons could then set about running the country as a single entity without the ridiculous division and rancour caused by Mr Blair’s stupid devolution arrangements. Personally I don't think paying them £250k will attract a better class of candidate. People capable of earning that sort of money would probably prefer to go and get a proper job.
As an aside, what’s happened with the Northern Ireland Assembly is a case in point. Principally because of shortcomings in its constitution (necessitating so-called “power sharing” between two factions fundamentally opposed to each other on a major principle) It was suspended in 2002-03 for around a year and has again been suspended for the past four months. As far as I know nobody has died or failed to have their dustbins emptied as a result. It is clearly an expensive, unnecessary institution as are most of the other local government outfits spread across the land.