Voters would be able to oust disgraced rural MPs more easily than those with urban seats under plans to be debated today,legal experts have warned.

The Law Society of Scotland called for a radical rethink of the so-called Recall Bill.

Yesterday Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg signalled his desire to toughen up the proposals, calling for outside experts rather than MPs to have the final say on whether constituents can try to sack their representative.

All parties are keen to persuade voters that they understand a growing disenchantment with politicians.

But the Law Society of Scotland said the Recall Bill, due to have its first Commons debate today, is the wrong vehicle.

Amending existing legislation would be a better way to allow voters to get rid of errant MPs without having to wait until the next general election, it added.

Under the current plans, if 10 per cent of voters sign a petition to "recall" an MP this triggers a by-election.

Michael Clancy, the Society's director of law reform, said: "The numbers of registered voters in each of the 650 UK constituencies varies widely, with urban areas as a rule having a much higher number.

"In effect, this means that it could be potentially easier to oust MPs in rural areas, as it would be much easier to attain 10 per cent of the electorate to sign the petition."

"This provision needs more thought in order to ensure fairness between MPs and their constituents."

He added: "The most appropriate way to deal with this would be to amend the Representation of the People Act 1981 to include the provision for disqualifying MPs who have received a prison sentence of less than one year."

Critics have claimed that voters have to be involved in the process to ensure MPs are not sacked for actions their constituents support.

Under the Bill a petition could be created if an MP has been sentenced to jail or has been suspended from the House for at least 21 days.