I AM writing to comment on the recent pieces by Kirsty Hughes (June 20) and Lesley Riddoch (June 21) about Brexit. European Movement in Scotland (EMiS), which I chair, is a co-organiser of the Scotland For Europe campaign, along with Kirsty, and other civil society groups including the Scottish Council for Voluntary Organisations.

The campaign says unashamedly that Scotland, whose voters preferred in the EU referendum and in every poll since to Remain, is better off in the European Union. 3000 fellow citizens, including Lesley, have signed up in the three weeks since we launched to say they agree. EMiS is cross-party and works with all who want an EU future.

We do not think that it is pointless to continue working to defeat Brexit. A tidy outcome within the single market and customs union is not a given. The negotiations with Monsieur Barnier and the EU27 could end in stalemate, and a cliff edge, if the Prime Minister is prevented by Brexiters from agreeing a solution on the Ireland/Northern Ireland border. Or the eventual deal, perhaps a variation on the EU/Canada Trade Agreement, could be so patently detrimental that Tory rebels re-find backbone and Westminster votes it down. Or, the European Parliament could veto the proposed arrangements for any number of reasons.

Thousands of all parties and none will march on Westminster tomorrow, and Scotland will hold its own March Against Brexit on Sunday at 2pm in Perth. People will be demanding the right to have a People’s Vote to choose between whatever the outcome of those negotiations is and remaining in the EU on the UK’s current terms.

No detailed prospectus was set out by the Leave campaign in 2016 and the broad promises they did make will not be delivered. Once we know what Brexit does mean, it is perfectly justifiable to ask the people if they still want it. The process is sui genesis and sets no precedent for any future Scottish independence referendum.

The Scottish Government has been stalwart in defending Scotland’s constitutional position and for making the case about the damage that Brexit will do, in particular dropping out of the single market and customs union. A number of SNP politicians support Scotland for Europe, and have signed our declaration. Your readers can take a look and sign up too, at www.scotlandforeurope.scot, if they agree that nothing in Scotland’s future relationship with the European Union is inevitable, that this country does not have to accept passively a Trumpian future, that Scotland can have ambition and show leadership for EU values and the international co-operation that promotes equality, social and political change.

Vanessa Glynn

Chair, European Movement in Scotland

I AM afraid that my delight over the Ineos defeat in court is somewhat tempered by an awareness that this is only a slight hiccup in the attempt to ensure fracking happens in Central Scotland (Ineos loses legal challenge against Scottish Government’s fracking ban, June 19).

I hope that, especially after the developments last week, folk are much more aware of the impact that the power grab will have on this subject. While Westminster already retains the power to issue the licences, once they have power over environmental affairs they will be able to overrule Holyrood and give Ineos permission to go ahead, whatever we say. The vast, unmapped network of disused mines under the built areas of Central Scotland almost guarantees damage by subsidence, as fracking moves sideways for up to four kilometres. Therefore everyone would be well advised to study their title deeds, which are likely to lay liability squarely on any future contractor working in these underground areas.

When Westminster gives Ineos the go-ahead, will Jim Ratcliffe put a guarantee in writing to honour this liability, especially if it affects hundreds of houses? With this statement of potential future risk in legal black and white, no insurance company will pay up.

I imagine I am not the only person who has watched with increasing concern as Ratcliffe has bought up North Sea assets, built new facilities to handle fracked gas and even demanded the permanent closure of the main direct Grangemouth-to-Bo’ness road because of this expansion. It has been obvious that he intends to frack whatever the opposition, and expects to have too great a hold on the economy and employment of this area to be refused. In any case, he is rich enough to see off any challenge.

Why on earth, during the last strike at Grangemouth, when Ratcliffe claimed his investment had been reduced in value to £1, did Alex Salmond not say: “Here’s your pound”?

L McGregor

Falkirk