HAVING voted to leave the European Union in the 2016 referendum and after months of soul searching I have finally come round to the idea that this was a monumental error of judgment on my part. Whilst most Leavers will maintain that they were fully aware of the consequences of their vote, myself included, I am afraid that we were living in a fantasy world. If I had been fully briefed on the consequences of Brexit and what appears to be the damage in store for, and already done to, our country I would have voted differently. Up until fairly recently I even argued the case for leaving the EU in your Letters Pages, however having weighed up all the pros and cons and the inevitability of being cast adrift from our near neighbours without a lifebelt I now hold my hands up and am prepared for the onslaught of abuse waiting in the wings for me from Eurosceptics and died-in-the-wool leavers for being a “turncoat”.

Whilst I am not blind to the negative stance taken by the EU towards Brexit and its intransigence during negotiations I now feel it is time to throw in the towel, admit defeat, regroup and then fight for change from within, and I mean fight with a great deal more determination that David Cameron when he returned from Brussels with a sugar-coated offer which had the EU laughing at our acceptance of virtually an “aucune affaire importante” or “nicht viel”. A state of affairs which precipitated our current predicament.

I am quite sure that given time we could convince other EU members, with similar views on change as our own, to collectively challenge the status quo internally.

So now that most of the facts are at our disposal it is time to give our country another referendum on this monumental issue and provide voters a chance to reverse the Brexit decision. Assuming as I do that many Leavers will change their vote, Article 50 should then be withdrawn, however complex, without further delay. Only prompt action will avoid our country sliding into the abyss which surely awaits us on March 29, 2019, and by which time it will be too late.

Christopher H Jones,

25 Ruthven Avenue, Giffnock.

ALEX Orr, leading figure in the EU-funded European Movement (Letters, August 15) helps to fill out what little popular knowledge there is with regard to the UK’s position in the European Union. In drawing our attention to the removal of various EU administrative establishments in the UK (though surely he has not named them all?) he has alerted many of us to the existence of unsuspected EU competences.

Some of these establishments, like the EU police training college, were simply sops for a country rightly perceived to be the least supportive among member states for EU integration. Others, like the European Banking Authority, were a natural choice, given the prominence of London’s financial industries.

However, the location of headquarters does not confer power. No doubt these institutions provide a very welcome boost to local employment – though it would be interesting to learn how many of their employees are nationals of other EU states. But from the original conception in the Treaty of Rome of “ever closer union among the peoples of Europe” power has been systematically drained from Parliament, local government and in Scotland, even community councils, into the Brussels hub from which these various administrative institutions have been distributed to foster the illusion of participation. Their loss was inevitable and unlikely to affect the world status of a Britain severed from the EU, which seems to be the apprehension of Mr Orr. What does confer power and hence status is the ability to impoverish the people of a sovereign country through trade restrictions and to deploy armed force or use the fear of it.

A few years ago, there were references to the EU Navy’s role in suppressing piracy in the Horn of Africa. This accidental revelation of EU naval capacity seemed not to have been repeated and now Mr Orr refers only to the European Union Naval Force (EU Navfor) and its associated bodies and the loss to Britain of their operational headquarters.

The effect on the UK’s standing in the world produced by the withdrawal of the agencies quoted by Mr Orr pales into insignificance alongside consideration of the new status and function of the British Navy, not forgetting nuclear submarines and two huge state-of-the-art aircraft carriers.

Mary Rolls,

58 Castlegate, Jedburgh.

AS the disaster of Brexit unfolds, along with the growing divergence of Scotland and England and as the clamour for a second independence referendum increases we should look again at the great achievements of the late Canon Kenyon Wright. He was a religious and political giant, who as a lifelong supporter of CND was never a member of any political party, yet is acknowledged as the Godfather of devolution.

This quiet and gentle man was able to unite political parties, trade unions, business bodies and faith organisations in calling for a Scottish Parliament. Under his inspirational leadership, as chairman of the Scottish Constitutional Convention, the devolution blueprint was published on St Andrews Day, 1995 – opposed only by the Tory Party.

It had been a long road from the narrow Yes victory in the 1979 referendum, which Westminster did not accept, to the overwhelming yes majority in the second 1997 referendum which established the historic return of a Scottish parliament in 1999.

In the recent 2014 referendum Kenyon Wright became a positive and vocal supporter of independence, writing at the time: "Devolution is power by the gift of others. Power in Scotland is ours by right".

Against the anger and fury of British nationalism it is good to reflect on the quiet achievements of Kenyon Wright. The peaceful passion, persuasiveness and persistence of this man, who devoted his life to helping others and to creating a better society, should inspire an independent Scotland, open to the world yet in concert with all the peoples of the British Isles and in confederation with the independent nations of Europe.

Grant Frazer,

Cruachan, Newtonmore.

THE concern expressed by Ian W Thomson (letters, August 16) about applying today’s moral values and ethical judgements to events and actions of ages ago prompted by the report that the plaque on an Edinburgh statue is to be revised in the interests of historical accuracy and political correctness, leads me to ponder which current Big Name personages might be sculpture candidates for posterity.

Some leading Brexiters come to mind; or am I thinking of effigy?

R Russell Smith,

96 Milton Road, Kilbirnie.