AS I write Jacob Rees-Mogg has just announced that he has put in a letter of no confidence in the Prime Minister. It is assumed that many others in his Brexit grouping will follow suit.

David Davis the resigned Government minister has asked the sensible question of why would it be a good idea to try to install another leader at this stage of the negotiations. Clearly the answer is that those in that wing of the Conservative Party want us to throw in the towel and walk off into the world of World Trade Organisation agreements in March next year. All the disaster scare stories would then come true. Queues at Dover, empty supermarket shelves and all the rest. The present trickle of companies relocating from UK to the EU would become a flood.

In my view it would be a criminal abdication of responsibility if this was allowed to happen without some form of wider consultation. Let the Prime Minister present her plan to the House of Commons. If it is voted down, as looks likely, we are then into the options of the same WTO scenario, a General Election with Brexit delayed or another Brexit referendum, also with Brexit delayed.

Here in Scotland we wait. Throughout the whole process we have been ignored. Several sensible suggestions have been put forward to mitigate the problems we are likely to face without so much as a reply. Scotland is not even mentioned in the tome agreed as the divorce plan despite voting overwhelmingly to remain and being likely to suffer most from the process.

The First Minister has kept her powder dry in the ongoing chaos that is Westminster. She will be well aware that our patience is running out with this approach. We are now in the endgame and very soon it will be time for us to decide whether we wish to stay with this foundering ship or man the lifeboats.

Let battle commence.

DS Blackwood,

1 Douglas Drive East, Helensburgh.

THE noun "disingenuousness" is a big, fancy word for what is essentially a small, no-nonsense idea: lack of integrity.

The Prime Minister may claim with some justification that the 2016 referendum on Europe was conducted by Britain, per se, not its constituent nations. That people voted as UK citizens, not disparate countries of the UK, and that, therefore, the idea that one of those nations, Scotland, in its singularity, can, validly, claim any advantage by pursuing the notion that Scotland voted to remain while the UK voted for Brexit is, indeed, disingenuous. Fair enough ... just about.

However, the notion that those who voted for Brexit in 2016 did so in the full knowledge and understanding of exactly what that vote entailed tests the meaning of "disingenuousness" to its ultimate point of destruction, I fear, and that anyone who claims otherwise is sadly misguided. The very fact that the recent production of a 585-page document in mind-boggling legalese no fewer than two years after such a vote, and by definition, unavailable back in 2016, is surely testament to such a claim.

Furthermore, cries of "We're fed up with the whole business; just get on with it", suggest an electorate for whom "nose to the grindstone, shoulders to the wheel", "we're all in this together, "stand up and be counted" and other vacuous nonsenses, constitute rational thinking.

With the egregious prospect of a Jeremy Corbyn-led Labour UK government as an alternative to the current tumbling Tories, now, if never before, should Nicola Sturgeon grasp the thistle of an independence vote for Scotland.

Gerard McCulloch,

Moffat Wynd, Saltcoats.

DR Gerald Edwards (Letters, November15) seems blind to the fact that it was the choice of a small majority of two of our united countries and most certainly not the choice of a large majority of the other two countries to leave the EU. He then puts all the blame on to the EU for England wanting to leave and take the ball with them, and that if Theresa May had a majority in Westminster then it would all be fine and she could bully us, and the EU into whatever deal she wants.

He further adds to the overbearing description of Westminster by stating "the UK will not be a willing partner to a break-up". Does this mean they will be threatening and bullying us to stay, because their impassioned pleas and promises made before the last referendum have been shown to be completely false?

Is he happy with the situation that this nation finds itself in, subordinate to a larger country of which it is supposedly an equal partner in a union, having a lack of control over vital areas such as immigration and most of its economics and having to pay into a pot most of its taxes to have a fraction returned as a "grant".

Scotland is being dragged into oblivion on the coat tails of an incompetent and self-serving Westminster Government and I cannot for the life of me understand why Dr Edwards and his ilk cannot see this. He certainly seems aware of the overbearing attitude shown to us by Parliament. The rest of us are angry about it; he seems quite content.

Ian McAulay,

42 Woodbank Crescent, Glasgow.

DR Gerald Edwards suggests that “the mess the UK is in is all due to European Union intransigence and Theresa May’s lack of a clear majority at Westminster”. I beg to differ.

The mess is due to David Cameron asking voters to make a simple decision on a complex question and the leaders of a disreputable and dishonourable Leave campaign exaggerating immigration fears and making promises they could never keep. Add the decades-long, post-Empire ravings of a largely right-wing UK press hostile to the EU, mix well, and chaos emerges.

The European Union has stuck to its four principles regarding freedom of movement. Why should it change them just for the UK which is causing all the problems? The wishes of 27 other countries have to be considered. That may be intransigence from Dr Edward’s perspective but, then, he looks at the question purely from a UK position without regard to the whole picture. It’s hardly surprising that the UK is now being put firmly in its place to protect the principles of EU membership.

Dave Stewart,

6 Blairatholl Avenue, Glasgow.

WHAT parallel universe does Gerald Edwards inhabit where in the current chaos, what we need is more Conservative MPs?

More people no doubt of the calibre of Peter Bone, Ian Duncan Smith, Esther McVey, Bill Cash, John Redwood, David Davis,

Jacob Rees-Mogg and not forgetting Boris.

Lewis Carroll would struggle to come up with the nightmare fantasy that is the Brexit scenario.

Jim McSheffrey,

61 Merryvale Avenue, Giffnock.

OVER the past few years we have been assured by one fantasist after another that Brexit would give us admission to a land of milk and honey. We have been assured that our exit from the European Union (EU) would be simplicity itself because the EU would be desperate not to lose our business. Ministers with no experience of ever running a business, like Liam Fox, arrogantly told us that countries would be fighting for trade deals with the UK. We in Scotland were threatened with being excluded from the EU if we voted for independence.

With all this duplicity coupled by the shock that they had won the advisory referendum by a tiny majority Theresa May rushed into triggering Article 50, committing the country to a ludicrously short two-year exit period. It was blatantly obvious that the Prime Minister and her cohorts had absolutely no idea what they had got into and their incompetence was laid bare for all to see. In their desperation to make it appear that they have secured an exit they are willing to jeopardise their precious "Union" by agreeing to different terms for Northern Ireland as to those for Scotland who also voted to remain.

In these circumstances to read Dr Gerald Edwards blaming the EU and the SNP for the chaos is either very dark humour or alternatively a superb ostrich impersonation.

What a load of Raabish.

David Stubley,

22 Templeton Crescent, Prestwick.