IF Michael Fry rightly highlights the financial crisis as the progenitor of the outcome of the Brexit referendum (After 10 years of financial crisis and Brexit looming, our only hope is indy, The National, August 15), doesn’t correspondent William Ross ably suggest the reason for the impasse we are in over Brexit (Letters, August 15)?

Fry illustrates how we can already see the economic mess that Brexit has caused, with the value of the pound dropping, the hesitancy of investment and the potential for us all to be worse off when extricated from the EU and the single market. It is a certain scenario, yet none of our politicians are able or willing to put their heads above the parapet, do what they are supposed to be paid to do, and represent our true interests by forcing a rethink.

Isn’t the reason because the official line is that propounded by William Ross, who has trotted out an argument for democracy in action which he claims can’t be reneged on? According to him a majority voted for Brexit in the referendum, and a majority voted for parties supporting Leave in the General Election. Not following the chosen path would somehow be a deficit of democracy?

So the appalling nature of the poorly crafted referendum, based on abject lies from unaccountable politicians, and a Labour party that disingenuously converted its Remain policy to Leave at the behest of a leader who supports self-determination for every independence seeking group apart from Scots, and where two-thirds of the electorate did not consent to Brexit, means that we have no alternative but to ignore our predicament and bash on regardless into Brexit economic oblivion. Isn’t this the real democratic deficit?

We vote in a bad government, and the opposition has the means in Parliament to hold them to account and the electorate can change it. With this appalling Brexit situation, we have no such opportunity because our politicians are not holding this government to account. Our politicians are failing us. We who will suffer the impact of this Brexit folly are powerless.

So, Michael Fry’s premise is correct. Westminster as a guardian of our public interest is an establishment busted flush. Without real opposition among MPs to question bad policies and hold them to account, it serves no useful purpose for an electorate placing their faith in those supposed to properly represent and protect their real interests.

Scottish independence is now the only means whereby political sanity may prevail, at least here in Scotland. The failure of MPs in Westminster has left no alternative. Shouldn’t we be getting on with it before the easily foreseeable detrimental impact of this Brexit lunacy irreparably damages us?
Jim Taylor
Edinburgh

INTERESTINGLY, we had two contrasting articles or statements in The National, August 15, from two former members of the two-party system within the British state. Henry McLeish and Michael Fry offered contrasting views on independence. Michael Fry sees independence for Scotland as the only way out of our present difficulties within the hapless British state. Yet Henry McLeish says he is “nearly there” on the possibility of backing independence.

Why Henry McLeish thinks that Labour in Scotland in its present set-up is viable is beyond comprehension. It has abdicated its position by backing the Unionist stance at all costs, given the now proven fact that it brought in a Tory government at the last General Election.

The parties of the British aka English state are not benign to Scotland at all. He simply has to cut the ties to “his” party. It is now in a political vacuum within Scotland.
John Edgar
Stewarton

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Women are not passive by nature – training starts early

THE point that men and women are “different”

is assumed by Richard Lucas to be a fact (Letters, August 15). I note below just one of many thousands of very interesting experiments which would say otherwise.

Scientists dressed several babies aged six months. Some were boys dressed as boys, some were boys dressed as girls and vice versa. The behaviour of the adults holding these six-month-old babies was fascinating and very revealing. Girl and boy babies dressed as girls were held in a more gentle manner, and frequent dress smoothing was obvious, whilst boys and girls dressed as boys were generally bounced around and handled more roughly and spoken to in a generally rougher manner.

As a women who has had three daughters and one son, three granddaughters and three grandsons during my 64 years on this earth, I can honestly say that there are minor differences between men and women but the prevailing cultures of many societies imposes a great burden on men to be a man’s man and for women to take a backstage role.

My mother was born in 1915 to a very poor family. She died aged 92. She worked from the age of 14 to 60. She was proud of her working life and of me. When “feminism” was declared in the 1960s my mother just laughed. She said she did not need to campaign for feminism, “she just lived it”. I only bother to write this letter as a homage to my mother and father who always treated me as an individual who could do anything I set my mind to. I believe that my confidence in all circumstances is because of them and the way they brought me up.

Perhaps Richard Lucas believes many women do not speak up at public meetings because they have a womb. I beg to differ. I suggest it is because women are expected to be passive within our society and that that conditioning starts on day one.
Mary Baxter
Address supplied

WELL done Monica Lennon in proposing free sanitary products for all in our schools and other public places (MSP bids to make sanitary products free to all, The National, August 14). There should be no discrimination between poor and better-off in this context and we will take as normal seeing towels for use as we do soap at hand basins.

I would also support a 1p increase in taxation for those above a certain level of income in order to pay for these and other social amenities.
Janet Cuningham
Stirling

ON Monday I almost went into cardiac arrest when the Scottish newsreader on BBC Breakfast came out with a positive story about Scotland. However, it should have been followed by: “Normal service will be resumed as soon as possible.”

Today we hear that “information obtained by the BBC” shows that some councils in Scotland are owed lots of money and default on payments. There was nothing to say where this is a trend across Scotland or how Scotland compares with the rest of the UK. Even baby boxes, being distributed to “every” new mum across Scotland, had a sting in the tail. The BBC just had to add that baby boxes were distributed in other parts, but did not make it clear that they are only distributed free of charge and only by a Scottish Government in Scotland.

Is it not time that Scotland had a proper, grown-up, Scottish broadcasting network?
Walter Hamilton
St Andrews

WELL, how thick are this lot at BBC Scotland? On Monday night they decided to do a report on the Radio Scotland Pirate Radio Station, a wee auld boat off the east coast of Scotland in international waters in the 60s (those of you too young don’t know what you missed).

Anyway according to BBC Scotland it was off the Ayrshire coast near Troon?

So who are they employing that doesn’t have either a basic knowledge of topography or a basic knowledge of investigative journalism?

The crew of said boat set off/landed at Methil Docks. Now for the information of BBC Scotland, that is on the east coast of Scotland in Fife, meaning something like a 500-mile journey across the north of Scotland to get to Troon?

Jackie Bird believed it all as well, but then she is known to believe anything!
Ian Heggie
Glenrothes