YOUR editorial (“Farcical reality of Brexit economics”, The Herald, June 28) is right to warn of Brexit becoming Project Farce. Right now it is Project Drift, as the EU says no negotiations before Article 50 is triggered, while the UK says wait until we have a new PM (and probably a new Labour leader). What can we do to keep things moving?

First, if a post-Brexit agreement with the EU is to command public support, it cannot be negotiated by the Conservative Government alone, but needs the involvement of the other parties at Westminster, as well as the devolved governments (leaving aside for the moment second independence referendum for Scotland). Can the Westminster parties at least discuss a mechanism for achieving this?

The first question which has to be agreed is whether the UK is applying to be part of a single market, for which the EU will almost certainly require free movement of workers as well as goods, services and capital. That is a basic EU principle, and also the essence of what a single market is. If free EU migration is unacceptable, it will have to be a free trade agreement only.

The UK also has to replace 55 or more free trade agreements between the EU and non-EU countries which will no longer apply to the UK after Brexit. Is it possible to start these negotiations now to save some time, without waiting for the EU negotiations? We only have two years after the Article 50 button is pressed, from which must be deducted time for an agreement to be approved by 27 EU (or 30 EEA) governments and their national parliaments and the EU Parliament – six months if we’re lucky?

Finally, the setting up of a Cabinet Office Brexit unit (“Sturgeon in EU survival talks as PM calls for unity”, The Herald, June 28) is welcome, but does the UK Government have sufficient people with the necessary diplomatic, economic and legal expertise to carry on these multiple negotiations, while keeping the rest of the show on the road? If not, it should start recruiting them, immediately.

And if action is not taken on the above? Enter Project Omnishambles.

Alastair Wallace,

19 Lixmount Avenue, Trinity, Edinburgh.

ONE of the more interesting things to come from the Commons statement of Prime Minister David Cameron on Monday was the formation of a Whitehall Brexit Unit.

This unit will be formed of officials of the British civil service, funded by the public purse, whose remit shall be to study the ramifications of the Leave vote, and report to and advise the Cabinet and future Prime Minister the best course of action in the exit negotiations.

I am sure this shall be of great comfort to all the Leave voters who are tired of having legislation decided and enforced in the UK by unelected, faceless bureaucrats, without public consultation, and at the expense of the British taxpayer.

Leslie John Thomson,

2 Moredunvale Green, Edinburgh.

IT is a moral, political and democratic decision for the UK Parliament to implement the result of the EU referendum but it does not appear to be a legal one. It could be argued that the future of the UK is at stake and consequently not invoking Article 50 to leave the EU may be regarded by Westminster as vital for the national interest and indeed for the survival of the UK as we know it.

Consider the options. By not implementing Article 50, those voting Brexit will be furious and there is a serious risk of civil commotion and those currently feeing ignored and disenfranchised will be even more so. There will be serious challenges to the meaning of democracy in the UK but what else would happen and could there be some kind of trade off for those previously voting leave?

Implementing Article 50 could be a lot worse. The implications for Northern Ireland and the Republic of Ireland are huge and could develop into more than civil commotion. In Scotland a second independence referendum is likely to be won given the huge vote to remain in the EU, especially if Nicola Sturgeon is able to demonstrate there is a serious prospect of Scotland remaining in the EU. What remains of the UK would be a very different place indeed. At Westminster a clear majority of MPs will be expected to vote for something they do not want. It is also clear that the economy may decline severely and it is already moving into uncontrollable territory. Voting for Article 50 begins to look like a UK suicide note.

My misty crystal ball shows what might happen. The new Conservative leader is almost certain to be pro EU, and I would put my money on Theresa May or Phillip Hammond, with the Tory Brexiteers now being persona non grata. A general election will be called on a ticket of remaining in the EU and it is likely every other main party will follow suit with the Brexit stance being maintained by UKIP. The Conservatives will be the clear winners as the Labour Party, perhaps with a new leader, will still be deeply divided and in no position to seriously threaten the Tories.

In Scotland, the SNP will do very well on an EU platform but the need for a second independence referendum will be called into question at this time, with a buoyant Ruth Davidson capitalising on events. Scottish Labour will have no choice but to be pro-EU but is unlikely to influence events in Scotland given its anti-independence stance. Nicola Sturgeon in turn will have to continue playing her cards very carefully indeed.

Alan M Morris,

20 Kirkhouse Road, Blanefield.

THE pub sign in London shown in Ken Smith’s Diary (“Why not come in and have a pint before you move to Scotland”, The Herald, June 28 surely holds some reasoning.

Our First Minister seems to be acting seriously, indeed with some determination, to keep Scotland in the European Union. It is difficult to imagine how we could arrange to be both in the EU and also in the post-Brexit UK. Presumably we would need two passports as we would, in one sense, have dual status, but I find the prospect of an inevitable EU border with England unattractive.

The result would be a bizarre and distorted form of devo-max which Westminster may however have to concede eventually as the price of keeping the UK semi-intact.

I suspect that perhaps the SNP doesn't fully realise the possible impact of this fixation. To those EU passport holders from abroad, working in England, who now feel rather uncomfortable with the referendum result, the First Minister is effectively saying "give me your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free".

Of course, Scotland has a rich and very long peacetime history of welcoming people to be part of our national family. Even we Scots as a race are incomers as Dr Wilson of Edinburgh University revealed through DNA research four years ago. For example, he found that more than one per cent of all Scotsmen are direct descendants of the Berber and Tuareg tribesmen of the Sahara.

However, I hope that the SNP-controlled Holyrood government has made sufficient financial contingency for a possibly significant influx of people with an EU passport who wish to remain somewhere on our sceptred isle with the same EU status as now.

Bill Brown,

46 Breadie Drive, Milngavie.

GIVEN the fact that Scotland is neither a region nor a county of England but indeed a co-signatory, just as England is, of the Treaty of Union, it would suggest to me that the democratically-reached results of the Brexit referendum in each country are equally valid. However, as these results are diametrically opposed to each other, surely this fact alone could invalidate the conditions set out in the said Treaty, thereby provoking a natural divorce.

Hugh McLean,

14 Shawfarm Apartments, 64 Newtonlea Avenue, Newton Mearns.