SO they have, as one could say, “Been and Gone and Dunnit!”. At nine this morning it came over the airwaves that the European Court of Justice have found in favour of the case brought by our “Famous Six”; that a country can cancel and withdraw its previously stated intention to leave the European Union by cancelling its Article 50 notice and thereby bringing the whole sorry business to an end and returning to the status quo.
I feel that the six Scots people involved in the front line of this – Alyn Smith MEP, Joanna Cherry MP, Andy Wightman MSP, Ross Greer MSP, Catherine Stihler MEP, David Martin MEP – representing as they do three different shades of political opinion from Scotland, deserve the highest praise possible for the action which they have taken, against overwhelming odds, and achieved what was derided by so many of the right-wing Westminster scene.
It gives a whole new scenario which over the coming weeks may well become very relevant indeed. The present warring factions are far too deeply entrenched in their own biased positions. “Brexit means Brexit” – what exactly does it mean? It appears to mean whatever one cares to make it – generally, however, it would seem to be based on the conclusions of the Leave campaign which Harold Wilson, if he had been around today, would probably have said were “based on terminological inexactitudes”.
So there is another way, temporarily at least, to get out of this frightful mess in which we find ourselves. It is no longer just a question of Premier May’s fudge or a no-deal fall-out. There is now the option of postponing the Leave date, and in the extra time thereby achieved calling into use the position spelt out by the ECJ and remaining in the EU. Of course, where this would take the Union-flag-waving sections of the extreme right of the Tory and Labour parties at Westminster is anybody’s guess.
It would, however, provide a platform for an honest and accurate assessment of the facts of leaving to be put before the voters of the remainder of the UK, at later date, hopefully after Scotland had left this sorry – and unlikely to improve – political quagmire.
George M Mitchell
Dunblane
READ MORE: EU court rules UK has power to unilaterally stop Brexit if it chooses to
THE secret is now out. There is another choice: we can remain in the EU and no member state can object!
The proposed exit, which for Scotland has been like a disenfranchised wife being forced to move from her home, and her friends of more than 40 years, to the severe financial disadvantage of all her family, despite the furious but ineffectual protests of all those concerned.
The inequalities of the Union could not have been exposed in starker terms. Scotland’s wishes are totally subservient to those of our Southern neighbours.
Westminster says “Jump!” and through the hoop we leap. Iraq, Afghanistan and back to the 14-18 war being classic examples.
Now is the time to head for “the divorce courts” and sever the chains.
Joseph G Miller
Dunfermline
READ MORE: Sturgeon accuses UK of 'pathetic cowardice' over Brexit vote
The ECJ has judged that the UK can unilaterally revoke Article 50. What a bombshell! It is interesting to read the UK press grudgingly report that the impetus came from Scottish politicians. How it sticks in their craw!
But at this juncture in the Westminster self-imposed crisis it will cause a tsunami across Westminster party lines. The Labour-Tory duopoly at Westminster will “atomise” even further now that down south there is an apparent majority now for Remain.
The SNP and allies have moved well on this issue. How will the Remainer Unionist parties at Holyrood react now? The ba’ is indeed amang the slates noo!
John Edgar
Kilmaurs
READ MORE: Nicola Sturgeon challenges Corbyn to vote down Theresa May
IF ever evidence was needed, we got it today as the PM once again caved into her backbenchers as she called off the EU deal vote scheduled to have taken place today! This action by the PM demonstrated absolutely no consideration for the country, only appeasing her backbenchers as she continued in her self-praise of her deal, which she arrogantly continued to promote in her parliamentary statement.
It is truly breathtaking arrogance and complete incompetence of a government in crisis, a government who have been guilty of contempt of parliament, who have been defeated three times in one sitting and are on their third Brexit Secretary.
Interesting that the successful challenge through the courts to allow the repeal of Article 50 received no mention from Mrs May in her statement – is repeal not an option?
Today in parliament was like a re-run of the EU referendum: no plan in place, no timetable, plunging the country and the economy into further chaos. Is the honourable lady merely buying herself another Christmas in No 10 ?
Catriona C Clark
Falkirk
BILLIONAIRE backers of a crash-and-burn Brexit will be popping the champagne corks in their island safe havens as soon as the Westminster pantomime reaches its climax. It is beyond belief that any country could be saddled with such a clueless, hapless, hopelessly incompetent government unless it was their intention to be so and leave Europe regardless.
Complicit in all of this is the BBC. Why didn’t the likes of Nick Robinson, Laura Kuenssberg and Andrew Neil challenge May’s repeated phrase, “no deal is better than a bad deal”? Why didn’t they ask her what a no deal would actually mean? Now, after days of debate in Westminster, the country is finally waking up to that prospect. The National was the first to flag up warnings about a no deal – sadly nobody was listening.
Mike Herd
Highland
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here