HOW did this all happen? I believe the Leavers won because of a perceived dictatorial stance of the other members of the EU. People were, wrongly in my view, fed up of the influences of the French and Germans while the bailouts of Greece and Italy were seen as spending our money. There was an undercurrent of dismay at the legal and health and safety protocols becoming mandatory in the UK.

So, why the backlash against the leave "deal"? Simple, the deal was forced on us by the EU due entirely to the totally inept negotiating skills of the UK led by Theresa May.

Now the Prime Minister wants an all-party discussion. Frankly, this is two years too late. Leaving is so important that a cross-party negotiating team should have been organised right at the start. Perhaps a team of business leaders instead of MPs would have been better.

We need to step back and tell the EU that the deal is not good enough for the whole country and to delay leaving to allow a re-negotiation. If that is not accepted then we will just need to leave without a deal. The purpose is to set them back on their heels with a huge rebuttal (I think our MPs might just have done that). Surely the EU must now be realising that its "best, non-negotiable deal" is just not good enough.

The people and businesses of Europe need our goods and services as well and they will be faced with similar gigantic problems.

Of course, a completely new Government will be required and the question will be: is Jeremy Corbyn able to take the lead?

Ken Mackay,

27 Ormonde Avenue, Netherlee, Glasgow.

I ONCE sat behind two women on a bus and overheard one tell the other that she was booked up to go on a bus mystery tour; surprisingly, her friend then promptly asked her where she was going.

It strikes me that this sums up the current issues surrounding Brexit. The referendum had a majority for going on a mystery tour but now we have some agitators sitting upstairs on the back seat shouting a lot and demanding to know where they are going and which route is being taken to get there. The fact is we should put the streamers out the windows, drink our bottles of ginger, get the sandwiches eaten and enjoy (or endure) the journey.

Nobody, including the driver of the Brexit bus, knows where we might end up on this particular mystery tour. The Brexit bus (the one emblazoned with £350 million on the side) might be heading for the sunny uplands of Marbella, Puerto Banus, Monte Carlo, Rome and the like. There again, we might be arriving at New Cumnock on a wet Wednesday afternoon with the shops either closed or boarded up.

John S Milligan,

86 Irvine Road, Kilmarnock.

AS someone who studied both Scots and English constitutional law at Glasgow University Law Faculty, I have been in despair at the Great Lie propagated by the Brexiters, namely a referendum is binding and Parliament is obliged to implement its result.

That is the opposite of the truth, as under English law a referendum is advisory only and Parliament being sovereign can ignore the result|.

Very little attention has been paid to the constitutional position of Scotland, something which I shall try to remedy.

Under Scots law Sovereignty lies with the people. The first manifestation of this was the Declaration of Arbroath of 1320. Robert the Bruce was King of Scots (not Scotland), was addressed as Your Grace not your Majesty, and ruled with the consent of the Scottish people in what was effectively a social contract between Monarch and the People.

This was enshrined in the Claim of Right Act 1689, passed by the pre-Union Scottish Parliament which encapsulated the requirements of Scottish constitutional law and enhanced the position of Parliament within the Scottish constitution at the expense of the Royal Prerogative.

The 1953 case of MacCormick v Lord Advocate reaffirms the principles behind the 1689 Act with Lord Cooper, the Land President of the Court of Session giving his opinion that "the principle of unlimited sovereignty of Parliament is a distinctively English principle and has no counterpart in Scottish constitutional law.

Even more importantly in July 2018 a motion proposed for debate in the House of Commons Standing order number 36 was agreed and resolved without contention which stated "That this House endorses the principles of the Claim of Right for Scotland ... and therefore acknowledges the sovereign right of the Scottish people to determine the form of government best suited to their needs".

In case anyone thinks that this is all just theory, it was that distinctly different Scottish constitutional position which was the driving force for the Scottish government and others to take a case all the way to the European Court which confirmed what some of us always knew that Article 50 is revocable unilaterally and a notification revoking Article 50 means not leaving the EU at all.

Further in pure legal terms no legislation needs to be passed in order for Article 50 to be revised and the sitting government now has the executive power to withdraw the notice at any point up to 29th March 2019.

This being the case, and the English doctrine of Parliamentary Sovereignty means that Parliament can ignore the referendum result. I look forward to the UK government taking responsibility and ending this Brexit farce once and for all by revoking Article 50 and bringing some sanity back to the lives of the UK population.

Keith Ross,

Flat 16 Minerva Court, 20 Elliot Street, Glasgow.

OUR beloved black lab was recently restored to us, recovering well after a very tricky operation to remove a melanoma from his jaw.

It was noticeable that a significant number of staff at the wonderful Royal Dick Vet School were from various EU countries.

Sadly, our brilliant, highly qualified French oncologist is one of many who will no longer be here this summer, persuaded to leave by the PM's "hostile environment" and uncertainty over Brexit.

What a loss. The brain drain is back again.

James Stevenson,

Drummond Avenue, Auchterarder.

EU Council President Donald Tusk says it's clear the British cannot agree on any deal and in the absence of a plan behind which the people can unite, the only sensible solution is to cancel Brexit for the time being.

Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker also suggested the only way to be sure of avoiding crashing out with no deal, which is in no one's interest, is for Britain to stand back and recover its famed pragmatism.

After the recent tsunami of lunacy in Westminster I truly believe that Britain's elderly, impoverished and marginalised are safer in the hands of the EU than in those of Red Jez or our crazed Tory backwoodsmen.

Rev Dr John Cameron,

10 Howard Place, St Andrews.