IN sheer frustration, I must finally take issue with your correspondents JS Morrison, Alan Fitzpatrick (Letters, July 19) and the numerous others who repeat ad nauseam that Brexit is the democratic will of the people. That, in my view, it most certainly is not. To be such, it should represent all those who have been and will be committing their lives and efforts to this country for as long as the results of Brexit continue. Yet David Cameron, with his focus entirely on his party divisions and attempting to ensure the result he wanted, technically rigged the voting electorate.

First, those most likely to live with the consequences are the young, 16 and 17-year-olds, just leaving school with their whole lives ahead of them to contribute to and benefit from our society. Yet they were excluded from voting on this crucial decision. So too were residents of foreign birth, even if they had lived here for 20 or 30 years, who demonstrated their commitment to this country and its future by marrying a UK citizen, bringing up a family, working, paying taxes and contributing to their community. Why were they excluded? Did they, and their children in years to come, not have a justifiable stake in the kind of future we will live with?

Yet many expats were given a vote, people who over the years have abandoned their input to the UK and gone to live, work and contribute to other countries around the world. They may have contributed nothing for years and may well have no input to our future. Was this in hope that they would vote with a blind, nostalgic loyalty to the UK, which would cost them nothing in thought at the time or in having to live later with the consequences, but would vote as Cameron hoped?

No-one can know how those who cared too little to vote at all might have affected the outcome. The input, however of the first two groups and exclusion of the last would at least have produced a result properly representative of the democratic will of all those with a stake in our future.

Let us stop spouting this fallacy in the hope that, heard often enough, it will miraculously become true. This, without doubt, is fake news.

P. Davidson,

Gartcows Road, Falkirk.

IAIN Macwhirter (“Sturgeon must now fight for a People’s Vote on the EU”, The Herald, July 18) makes a good case for a second referendum on the EU. The first one was held by David Cameron, not for the good of the country but to try to unite the Conservative party and save it from the threat of Ukip. If anyone should be accused of treason he is the first, as not only has the referendum not united his party, it has left Labour and the country divided and two years after the event we are no further forward and he has left the scene. The other charlatans mentioned in Gerry Seenan’s letter (July 17) who also put their own interests before those of the country can likewise be accused of treasonable behaviour. We all know what the result of conviction for treason would have been in the past.

While I would favour a second referendum on the final deal, I do not agree that an option should be to walk away without a deal as that would be disastrous. The option should be accept the deal or remain in the EU. It would need to be made clear what the effects and costs of leaving would be.

One final point which continues to annoy is the simple arithmetic error re the margin of the Leave win. As there were only two options leave/remain the margin is not four per cent but half of that as only two per cent + 1 of the Leave voters making a different decision would have

resulted in a Remain win.

Louie Macari,

42 Imlach Place, Motherwell.

I COMMEND JS Morrison for exposing the nonsense of those agitating for a second EU referendum under the guise of a People’s Vote on the matter.

Their reason for wanting another EU referendum is usually that those who voted to leave may have made a mistake, and would now be better informed voters (and vote Remain?).

However, in this, they choose to ignore the train of their own dubious logic that even if a second EU referendum voted Remain, this could not be the end of the matter as we might have made a mistake – requiring another vote ... and another ...

Realistically, a second EU referendum, in terms of how it was conducted, would simply be a re-run of the first, with politicians on all sides spouting rhetorical half-truths in the hope of getting the vote that they prefer. It wouldn’t be doing the people any favours.

We are where we are today regarding our relationship with the EU because many of our politicians just do not respect the majority vote of the people and prefer working to their own politically-correct hidden agendas.

Philip Adamson,

7 Whirlie Road, Crosslee, Renfrewshire.

JS Morrison suggests that “we would not be where we are today” if MPs from all parties had got behind the Government in its approach to Brussels. May I suggest that the Government’s real problem is that the Government isn’t behind the Government in its approach to Brussels.

Ruth Marr,

99 Grampian Road, Stirling.

WE learn from your front page article (“May survives but Europe now prepares for ‘no deal’”, The Herald, July 19 that the European Commission is expected to issue a report urging member states to prepare for the no-deal Brexit so eagerly being pursued by the tiny minority, in Parliamentary terms, of extremist right-wingers who are on the verge of achieving their aim.

Among the possible consequences of the no-deal Brexit being talked about is a problem with our supplies of medicines. Indeed I understand that the pharmaceutical industry has warned that medical supplies could run out or be interrupted. The UK Government must come clean with the voters and obviously with the pharmacists who are apparently preparing to stockpile medicines.

Jacob Rees-Mogg and his fellow elites who are prepared to risk causing so much damage to our economy, to our society and to our health have the wealth and influence to overcome, and possibly even benefit from, the various fall-outs resulting from the UK crashing out of Europe. The rest of us don’t.

John Milne,

9 Ardgowan Drive, Uddingston.

WITH Brexit threatening to implode we have three politicians, Jacob Rees-Mogg, Michael Gove and Boris Johnson, delighting in fomenting dissent and chaos. All three have been touted for possible leadership of the Tory Party. As John McEnroe was fond of saying, you cannot be serious.

Wilf O'Malley,

11Delnies Road, Inverness.