WATCHING Jacob Rees-Mogg being grilled by Andrew Neil after Tuesday night’s vote (March 12) in the House of Commons, I was struck by two things. First, that this was a rare occasion when a leading Brexiter has actually been challenged as to their claims by an interviewer. Neil did a very good job in putting Mr Rees-Mogg on the spot. Compare this to last night’s interview (March 13) after the vote (not with Andrew Neil), where Mr Rees-Mogg rehearsed again his mantra that all the Treasury forecasts of economic and financial disaster for the UK if we leave – deal or no deal – are fantasy. Yet this was not challenged as it should have been. On far too many occasions the Brexiter claims have been allowed to escape serious scrutiny. This is concerning.

Secondly though, I found to my astonishment that I actually was in agreement with Mr Rees-Mogg when he complained bitterly that the electorate were being let down by their MPs, and that there were “500 MPs” who were Remainers determined to thwart Brexit. (This of course ignores the fact that he and his fellow ERG right-wing Brexiters had voted against Mrs May’s Withdrawal Agreement).

I was reminded that it was just a few weeks ago that his fellow Brexiter Liam Fox was complaining similarly about the unelected House of Lords thwarting the wishes of the House of Commons in voting against the Withdrawal Agreement. So here we have the irony of two leading members of a Tory Party that has fought hard to preserve the outdated and flawed system of "first past the post" complaining about its obvious failings. We have ended up with an unrepresentative House of Commons and a Parliament whose inexperience (and unwillingness) to seek compromise has got us into this unprecedented mess.

Perhaps, just perhaps, from this collapse of parliamentary government we might see a cross-party consensus rallying round a determination to push for a system of proportional representation and the replacement of the futile House of Lords with an elected second chamber akin perhaps to the US Senate. I am not, though, holding my breath.

Eric Melvin,

6 Cluny Place, Edinburgh.

IAIN Macwhirter crystallises the choices we have in selecting the next leader of our nation ("It's the end of the road for May and perhaps the end of the road for Brexit", The Herald, March 13) and what an appallingly poor short list it is too: Boris Johnson, a proven liar, whose main objective is power to enhance his own standing, and Jeremy Corbyn, a left wing ideologue with no conception or understanding of the practical needs of the country.

Well, I have a solution. Simply put – vote for me. I am willing to sacrifice my sanity and my health in the furtherance of the national good. While previously not considering myself as an intellectual heavyweight, when viewed against what is currently on offer, together with what’s behind them – Chris Grayling (incompetent), John McDonnell (opportunist), David Davis (seriously?), Liam Fox (empty promises), Jacob Rees-Mogg (oh dear), et al – I now realise that due to my non-alignment with any political party and its dogma and being possessed of a degree of commonsense (as opposed to Oxbridge "brains") I would be a perfect choice.

Furthermore, I have no pretensions to earning thousands from spurious board appointments nor have I any wish to invade a third world country, and what’s more, I can start tomorrow. Not only that, but I have number of golfing colleagues who, between us, have already resolved Brexit, the backstop, the NHS (by cancelling Trident and advertising the savings on the side of a red bus) and who would be happy to serve as my Cabinet.

Think about it; does anybody seriously think I could do any worse?

Bob Buntin,

GF1 Morland House, Longhill, Skelmorlie.

Read more: Mhairi Black describes Brexit chaos as 'an absolute riddy' for the Prime Minister

IN a 2012 speech on the EU, David Davis, ultra-Brexiter and failed Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union, said: “If a democracy cannot change its mind, it ceases to be a democracy”.

Polls say that there is now a six-12 per cent majority in favour of remaining. I would suggest that is sufficient evidence to justify having a second referendum.

It would be disastrous to our democracy should we leave the EU contrary to the will of the people.

John Milne,

9 Ardgowan Drive, Uddingston.

IN the shambles that is the Brexit progress, the continued insistence that the country must “honour” the result of the Referendum is increasingly ludicrous. Laying aside the inappropriateness of the term "honour" in the context of the farrago of lies, illegal payments, undeliverable promises and covert racism that characterised the Leave campaign, it is difficult to see anything wrong with reconsidering the result in the light of new evidence.

Even the arch-Brexiter David Davis once said that being able to change one's mind was essential in a democracy. As has now become clear, any so-called deal and especially the disaster of no deal, will leave the country worse off than it is as an EU member. A mature and courageous legislature would recognise the narrow, party-political nature of the original referendum and point out the realities to the electorate, clearly and without ideological bias. In the national interest, such an administration would probably say that in present circumstances, it could not countenance leaving the EU, and face up to the manufactured wrath of the narrow majority who, for whatever dubious reason, voted to leave.

Dr RM Morris,

Veslehaug, Polesburn, Methlick, Ellon.

AFTER almost three years since the vote on the EU there is still no way forward. The PM hopes to get her deal approved by repeatedly asking the House of Commons to approve it yet will not ask the electorate a second time if the deal is what they voted for in 2016. This despite the fact that in three years the young people who were most affected by the result and were not given the opportunity to vote are now of voting age.

The PM keeps on saying that the deal she has agreed with the EU is what the voters wanted. How can she say that as there were many different reasons for selecting Leave on the voting forms?

Louie Macari,

42 Imlach Place, Motherwell.