I’VE just watched Prime Minister’s Questions in which Theresa May has deluded herself, and the Members of Parliament at Wastemonster, about the situation surrounding Brexit.

She seems to believe that it’s not democratic to return the vote to the people on Brexit, since the people have already voted on it. Yet she thinks it is democratic to bring back for a third time her Brexit deal that has already been rejected twice (once by the biggest majority ever, and once by the fourth-biggest majority), by the Parliament of which she is Prime Minister.

Despite several questions asking for the opportunity for other members to reach a consensus on this very important matter, she has refused. She remains under the delusion that she has listened to everyone, and the sort of changes that might get a decent deal have already been voted down by Parliament. Surely this is a lie.

It is the complete intransigence of the Tory Cabinet and her personal refusal to move any of her red lines on securing a deal that has prevented a better deal being obtained.

The Scottish Government, under the very able leadership of Nicola Sturgeon, has made several meaningful suggestions which would have led to a much more amenable agreement on a Brexit deal. All of these have been completely ignored.

It now seems that we must either prepare to have foisted upon us a deal that the English Parliament at Westminster has already rejected or a completely disastrous “no deal”.

As I understand it, from articles I have already seen in The National, the Scottish Government has the authority to call advisory referendums, although these may not be legally enforceable.

Is it not now the proper time for such an “advisory” referendum on independence to be held?

If the people of Scotland indicate through that referendum that they wish to become an independent nation, could not the Scottish Government then ask for that referendum to be officially recognised and, failing its recognition by Westminster, then formulate some sort of withdrawal from the Treaty of Union of 1707 on the basis of the many breaches of that Treaty that have already been perpetrated by the English Parliament?

I use the Term “English Parliament” on purpose. As I understand it, the first three sections of the Treaty of Union were that the Scottish Parliament was to be disbanded, the English Parliament was to be disbanded and a new Parliament of Great Britain, with a written constitution, was to be formed and it would sit at Westminster.

If, indeed, that is the case (and I have no reason to believe it isn’t), then England breached that Treaty from day one because the Scottish Government was disbanded but the English Government was not. It continued as previously, with no written constitution, and all its procedures based on precedents.

A Parliament of Great Britain with a written constitution was never formed. The Scottish Members of Parliament were merely given seats in the English Parliament. That’s not what was agreed and signed up to.

Because England has breached the Treaty, surely the Treaty can no longer be valid and should be discontinued.

So, do we really need to ask for permission to hold a binding referendum? Would it not be enough to say that our people have voted for independence in an advisory referendum and the Treaty has already been broken by England so we are withdrawing from it?

Was it ever actually implemented if the first three requirements were broken from day one? Or have we just been conned from the start?

Charlie Kerr
Glenrothes