YOU never know, perhaps the Brexit omnishambles may have some positive fallout. The fact that Theresa May is turning to the opposition benches for allies rather than listening to the dinosaurs on the right of her own party is in a way refreshing ("Tories at breaking point as May turns to Corbyn", The Herald, April 3). It has been obvious for years that both major political parties are struggling with internal strife, Labour with a rump of Blairites and the Conservatives with a cohort who are still living in the 19th century when the Empire actually existed rather than being but a figment of their deluded imaginations. It demonstrates the moral corruption and venality that haunts Westminster that neither of these parties will jettison the dross simply because to do so our “first past the post” electoral system would rob them of a parliamentary majority and a chance to dip their noses in the deep end of the trough.

The nation is ill-served by a Government chosen from a party that was not supported by the majority of those who were eligible to vote and which then does not have the unqualified support of its own MPs. Many dislike the SNP but at least you know what it stands for (most of the time). Perhaps if the Conservative and Labour parties accepted the fact that they are not united cohesive units and broke into smaller parties the electorate would have a better idea of what their MP stood for. Maybe the day of a two-party state and a first-past-the-post electoral system has run its course and democracy should be given a chance to govern. Don’t hold your breath waiting for change.

David J Crawford,

85 Whittingehame Court, 1300 Great Western Road, Glasgow.

AN organisation takes its character from its chief executive, whose conduct is indicative of its integrity. A political party is no different, the voting public relying on this absolutely and necessarily when called upon.

The catalogue of broken promises, pretences, assurances simply ignored, and on occasions straightforward untruths, has irrefutably been the stock in trade of both major parties in the last 20-plus years. It is a sorry conclusion that right now neither leader of either party can claim total honesty in their behaviour, in particular since 2016. Even in the last few days the level of dissembling, avoidance of honest explanation of intentions and so on has reached staggering and unacceptable proportions. How can the integrity of two people who for months have consistently bitterly condemned each other, in public and at every opportunity, be relied upon when they are for sheer expediency now in cooperation “in the national interest”? The public are being asked to believe in the disingenuousness of party leaders who have in brutal fact no right to expect such trust. For example, are the “promises” being made to each other binding on their successors? Are they even binding on their own future conduct?

If the UK emerges from the present incompetent series of disasters it will be accidental.

J Hamilton,

G/2 1 Jackson Place, Bearsden.

I HAVE just received a glossy and expensive leaflet from my Tory MP in which he promotes his virtues, attacks the SNP, devotes a page in praise of Ruth Davidson, and states: "In the last General Election, I promised to work towards a managed, orderly Brexit". I recall no such promise and on May 30, 2017 you were kind enough to publish my letter in which I pointed out that his election material contained no policies other than opposition to a second Independence Referendum. Plus ça change.

In England, the majority of MPs, whether Remainers or no, appear to be instructed by the will of their constituents in the 2016 referendum. In Scotland the 13 Tory MPs have consistently ignored the will of their constituents and this recent leaflet from my MP exposes how afraid they are to discuss their Westminster actions.

Moreover, the leaflet indicates that they are getting big money from somewhere and are preparing for an imminent General Election. They clearly understand that they will have a hard job to persuade Scots ever to vote for them again.

KM Campbell,

Bank House, Doune. WITH comment from so many sources on the future relationship of the UK with the EU, there has been very little publicity given to the collective views of the inflated membership of the House of Lords.

While some may welcome the lack of involvement by those in the Upper House in such an important matter, it again calls into question the value of this institution.

Malcolm Allan,

2 Tofthill Gardens, Bishopbriggs.

Read more: SNP accused of 'game playing' on People's Vote

THE instruction from the British people was relatively clear in 2016. We voted to leave the European Union. The failure of the politicians, from all parties, to get behind this idea and make it work is not a good sign for our future democracy. Every political party has played its own conflicting set of cards ever since.

Bringing Jeremy Corbyn into the mix does not auger well. The EU is still not the panacea for all the UK's ills, Brexit isn't either, but the "will of the people" ought to be heard.

A General Election or a second referendum is frequently quoted as the answer, but no one has spelled out just how this can definitely solve the problem. We either stay, leave or hover halfway. The only democratic choice would be a hard Brexit or Mrs May's deal but in these irrational times, many politicians reject both outright but this was the will of the people, so one of these has to be the default option. We simply must accept the original decision to leave and move on.

Dr Gerald Edwards,

Broom Road, Glasgow.

THAT Nicola Sturgeon is proposing to cancel Holyrood's Easter recess because of Brexit is beyond risible ("Holyrood to sit during Easter recess to deal with Brexit", The Herald, April 3).

Brexit is entirely outwith Holyrood's responsibility. Scotland sends 59 MPs to Westminster, including 35 from Ms Sturgeon's own party, to (attempt to) legislate on such reserved matters as Brexit.

If she wanted to keep Holyrood open to address her failed record in managing our schools, roads and NHS, that would be 100 per cent laudable. But the likely truth is that Ms Sturgeon feels sidelined in Edinburgh and doesn't want to bypass any opportunity to generate anti-UK rhetoric from Holyrood's debating chamber.

Martin Redfern,

Woodcroft Road, Edinburgh.

FIRST of all, we had the attempted rapprochement between Donald Trump and Kim Jong-un. Now we’ve got the tentative tangoing of Theresa and Jezza. Whatever next, will Top Cat and Officer Dibble reveal themselves to be lifelong buddies of the bosom variety?

Alastair Patrick,

3 Pentland Crescent, Paisley.