THE machinations and self-importance of politicians associated with Brexit over a prolonged period, and the uncertainties and concerns generated for the population as a result, provide much food for thought.

Voltaire once opined in the 18th century that the Holy Roman Empire was “neither Holy, nor Roman, nor an Empire”. What do we see when we now consider Great Britain and Northern Ireland?

Well, most would concede that we have been something less than “Great” for some time now even although Rule Britannia still gets sung with gusto in some quarters. The future of Britain must be regarded as being on a shaky peg with Scotland, having voted 62 per cent to remain in the European Union, effectively being ignored by Westminster during the Brexit negotiations. Moreover, recent opinion polling has shown more Scots in favour of independence.

What of Northern Ireland? The DUP, hoping that Northern Ireland’s position in relation to Great Britain would not be diminished by the Prime Minister’s recently concluded deal with the EU, have been disappointed in spite of previous assurances and can be forgiven for feeling that their Britishness has been watered down. In addition, the support for a United Ireland appears to be on the increase.

Many in England have already expressed the view that they wish to have Brexit, even at the cost of Scotland leaving the Union and, as day follows day, it looks more likely that they may get their wish and thus being able to “stop shovelling money over Hadrian’s Wall’” as was once said. While the geography in that remark was less than accurate, the sentiment was perfectly clear. The future for Great Britain and Northern Ireland is looking increasingly uncertain and fragile, with its foundations being slowly and surely undermined.

Ian W Thomson, Lenzie.

MORE than 60 per cent of the population (Leavers and Remainers who agree to abide by the vote) has been in a state of anguish for almost four years, likely to continue, due to the subversion of a Parliament full of Remainers, despite the agreement of 600 MPs beforehand, to stand by the vote. Why? Because the basic obstacle to success was not understood. It is that the EU will not allow a deal advantageous to the UK. It set out to damage us to encourage other countries to remain. It has as as good as said "'you cannot leave because we must have a hard border", which it knows is impossible and which the DUP, which wishes to be integral in every way to the UK, would never approve or support in a Commons vote.

Successive prime ministers have been in an impossible position because of the limits of what the EU will allow. Decency from the EU disappeared with the vote to leave. Aided and abetted by the fifth column of MPs who then reneged on their promises to support the referendum result and have been subverting it ever since with one amendment after another, every one dishonest: holding up the process hoping for a reversal, a morally indefensible move. They even bleat "we are acting for the good of the country. We are the democrats here (a blatant lie). The damage will be colossal." The notion that only damage can result is a hysteria fomented by them. But it has not succeeded. People, the majority, want to see Brexit delivered.

There was, with hindsight, only one possible move by the UK which could have led to a successful Brexit: leave with no deal. Then the UK is not subject to EU rules or courts and can carve out for itself what its arrangements will be. For sure, the EU will be arriving in droves to re-establish trade, because it will not do without it. Let it make the trade deals. We seek to trade with the wide world and refuse to be restricted. After nearly four years, we are well prepared, billions have been set aside for the transition and Michael Gove has been at the delivery for months now. We ought to be ready.

William Scott, Rothesay.

ALAN Fitzpatrick (Letters, October 2) thinks the 2016 Brexit referendum result should be respected by disallowing the Remain option in any second referendum. I think that would disrespect the 2016 result by suggesting it might not be repeatable in more enlightened times. A better way to respect it is to assume that Leavers can still cope with the competition, even if they need to create new bus posters.

Robert Canning, Bridge of Earn.

WALTER M Stephen (Letters, October 23) chastises the Scottish Conservative MPs for giving Parliamentary support to Brexit when their constituencies voted Remain. Frankly, that’s what they ought to be doing notwithstanding that the majority of them are themselves Remainers. Parliament transferred, some would say abrogated, the decision on Europe to the people by way of a referendum. Furthermore Parliament has undertaken to implement the people’s decision.

For the Scottish Conservative MPs, and for that matter any other Parliamentarians, to renege on such undertaking would be undemocratic.

Incidentally, I voted Remain.

David SW Williamson, Kelso.

WHAT will the media do when/if Brexit is finally settled? I suppose there will still be the Royals. Heaven help us.

Malcolm Allan, Bishopbriggs.

Read more: Johnson accused of trying to shut Scottish Parliament out of Brexit process