I WHOLLY agree with the article by Alyn Smith in yesterday’s National (Why reverting to WTO rules won’t create a free-trading state, August 2).

In the immediate aftermath of the Brexit referendum (July 13, 2016) the Treasury Committee interviewed a panel of three including Mr Hosuk Lee-Makiyama on how to negotiate a future relationship with the EU.

The panel tried to flag up the dangers of Brexit to farming but the committee seemed to be more interested in retaining London’s position in the financial services market. Mr Makiyama explained what it would mean to be thrown onto World Trade Organisation rules (hard Brexit). He told them the best possible deal would be that which would most closely replicate the existing arrangement in the EU, but again the committee did not seem to understand let alone welcome the message.

It is worth viewing the session (available at bit.ly/BrexitWarnings), if only to see how little our political masters understood of issues that were obvious to the experts from the outset. In the intervening two years the elite which governs us do not seem to have made much progress.

C Walker

READ MORE: Alyn Smith: Why reverting to WTO rules won’t create a free-trading state

SUPPORT Brexit to get a more powerful hoover? You could not make it up. Reminds me of all those old EU myths like straight bananas. Even I, a passionate Remainer, could invent a better reason for leaving.

In any case, this regulation like so many others on food safety, animal welfare, package travel, contract terms and in this instance electrical standards were agreed by working groups of all European consumer reps like myself. We worked together in the best interests of of all European citizens to make life safer and better. I despair at the ignorance of pro-Brexit politicians, even if sometimes you just have to laugh.

Helen Millar

MR Tom Crozier (Letters, August 1) lays down a very fair challenge to Yes/Leavers such as myself to elaborate on our vision of an independent Scotland outwith the EU, so I would like to respond.

My own view is that the EFTA/EEA position would be best for Scotland as it would crucially protect us from the expansionist policies of the CAP/CFP, which have so damaged Scottish fishing and farming, which is presumably why Norway favours this option for their own industries.

Interestingly, EFTA was coy about re-admitting the UK after the 2016 EU referendum, yet is on record as being much more positive about an independent Scotland joining the EFTA bloc.

Together all the countries of the British Isles and Norway and Iceland in particular could form new economic relationships freed from the geo-political agenda of the EU, which is undemocratic and pro-austerity.

Cllr Andy Doig (Independent)
Renfrewshire Council

READ MORE: Letters: It’s hard to imagine Scotland rejecting the EU

ONE either believes in self-determination for Scotland or one doesn’t, and it is the citizens of Scotland who should collectively decide upon their future, in this interdependent world. Letters from readers suggesting that they would not seek self-determination for Scotland if it meant being one of the member nations of the EU denies the hard and sometimes uncomfortable reality of self-determination. It would be difficult to convince the citizens of Scotland to first go through a disorderly disengagement from the EU under the direction of a Ukip/Tory UK Government, then go through a second disengagement from a less than benign Ukip/Tory UK.

The options therefore left available are to start disengagement from the UK before a hard no-deal Brexit, or during a bad-deal Brexit transition period. Given that the bad-deal Brexit transition would result in a no-deal Brexit, I suggest that a date for indyref2 be sought now whilst the Ukip/Tory UK Government is separately meeting with various EU nations.

This Ukip/Tory UK Government sets great store by all UK citizens getting behind Brexit no matter how they voted, and so the Scottish Government must be clear and unequivocal that it now seeks a Section 30 for indyref2, in response to the demand of the citizens of Scotland who collectively voted to Remain in the EU, in both 2014 and 2016.

Stephen Tingle
Greater Glasgow

THANKS to Kirsty Hughes for such a clear and objective outline and update on Brexit (Sturgeon may not be able to delay indyref2 any longer, July 31). In complete and frustrating contrast to the various forms of fudge from both the Labour party and the SNP.

As a member of one and often an enthusiastic supporter of the other, I appeal to members to pass motions in their branches to back the people in calling for a People’s Vote. It is our future and it should be our choice, with at least a chance to make a more informed decision than we did last time.

Both the Green Party and The LibDems support a People’s Vote and remaining in the EU. Brexit of any kind will clearly be a disaster for all of us and we can and must stop it happening . How the SNP can support a second referendum on indy and not on the final Brexit deal beats me and it does not win them any support at all.

The rally in Edinburgh on August 18 for a People’s Vote will give us the chance to come together in taking one more step to stop this Brexit nonsense. Then we can concentrate on building towards the 60% we want for our indy referendum.

Tony Martin
Gullane, East Lothian

READ MORE: Kirsty Hughes: Sturgeon may not be able to delay indyref2 any longer​

THERE are great, wise and common decent contributors to The National Conversation, but Selma Rahman (Letters, August 2) takes the biscuit. Brilliant.

Ronnie Imrie

READ MORE: Letters: Home Office's silly-season comments are not funny​