"FANCIFUL and deranged” is how Boris Johnson has described the Scottish Government’s efforts to protect our country from one of the worst impacts of Brexit. As we brace ourselves for the impact of the utterly irrational, self-sabotaging project he’s been championing for the past five years, talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

Of course, it’s the kind of moderate, respectful language we’ve come to expect from the venerable statesman who famously said he would rather be dead in a ditch than seek an extension of Brexit to … let me just check my calendar … oh yes, today.

Maybe Nicola Sturgeon, instead of sending a 94-page report laying out proposals for a devolved Scottish visa system as she did this week, should just have made a public statement saying she would rather be struck by lightning than accept the end of freedom of movement.

At least then she might have finished communicating her message by the time a dismissive response was fired back.

There’s certainly nothing deranged about seeking to protect Scotland from the UK Government’s one-size-fits-all immigration policy. In truth, it’s a one-size-fits-none policy that is less about meeting the needs of any part of the UK’s economy than it is about satisfying the demands of Little Englanders.

READ MORE: Scotland’s most vulnerable to endure the worst of hard Brexit

You know, the kind of folk who will be dancing in the streets tonight, bellowing along to the countdown clock projected on 10 Downing Street, then squirrelling away all their commemorative 50p pieces to save up for their retirement to Spain.

The folk who roar with approval at Nigel Farage flashing his red, white and blue socks in the European Parliament might be a little less happy when they find their local hospital has closed wards due to an acute staffing crisis, or Nigel Jnr’s school has run out of teachers.

Then again, perhaps they will consider it a price worth paying if it means British hospital corridors for sick British people and British extended playtime for British children.

The problem with satisfying the demands of those Brexiteers who want to “get tough on immigration” is that some of them are – if not necessarily unhinged – just not very bright. If television vox-pops are anything to go by, many of those who voted Leave believe that ending freedom of movement will stop people coming to the UK from Africa and Asia.

For this, I blame the decision to let Australia compete in the Eurovision Song Contest. No wonder folk are confused when it comes to geography, and rules, and point-based systems. Presumably they believed that voting in accordance with the central policy of the party that attracted the most racists was the correct way to make sure there wouldn’t be too many brown people in Britain going forward.

READ MORE: Nearly 75% of Scots believe Brexit is wrong, new poll finds

But back to the Scottish Government and its utterly loopy proposals to parachute EU migrants into fruit fields surrounded by barbed wire and provide personal care for the elderly in Spanish via Skype (I’m assuming this is roughly what’s being suggested – I haven’t quite got around to reading the 94-page report myself).

When Boris Johnson described the plans he hadn’t read as “fanciful and deranged”, he was up to his usual tricks, describing not the actual contents – which I suspect will forever remain a mystery to him – but “a border at Berwick and a wall [and] inspection posts”, which he has apparently decided would be required if there was to be any variation in immigration policy to reflect the specific needs of the nations that make up the UK.

As Mike Russell pointed out at Holyrood yesterday, the Prime Minister doesn’t just insult the SNP with his dismissal of these proposals, but also plenty of others who think they are worth reading, including the Royal Society of Edinburgh, the President of Cosla, and the director of Universities Scotland. Even Stephen Kerr – Tory MP for Stirling before his ousting last month – said they were “worth looking at”.

Of course Ian Blackford challenged Johnson, telling the Commons he was mischaracterising the proposals and refusing to even contemplate basing an immigration policy on evidence rather than rhetoric. But it was to no avail. Johnson knows how this game works, and really it’s little more than a game to him. He knows that a soundbite – “no border at Berwick” – cuts through in a way that Nicola Sturgeon saying “a common, UK-wide approach to immigration simply hasn’t worked in Scotland’s favour for some time now” does not.

Only a Mad Hatter would believe the sane course of action is for the Scottish Government to simply accept that Brexit – a Brexit conclusively rejected by Scotland – must lead to a decline in our working-age population, and damage to businesses and communities that have been reliant on workers from elsewhere in the EU. Today’s triumphalist tea parties will be a global embarrassment, but Johnson’s use of Trumpian tactics should be an even greater concern. If nonsense and lies are allowed to drown out truth and pragmatism, we will truly be through the looking glass.