IT was in headlines down south that a group of Labour MPs were going to make an announcement on the Future of British Politics!

In actual fact it turned out to be the future of English politics. The English press cannot see a divide between English and British.

The future of politics in Britain, to be more precise, began when the duopoly north of the Tweed and the add-on LibDems was broken by the SNP!

READ MORE: Seven Labour MPs resign from party to start new 'Independent' group

The Brexit debacle has begun a splintering process in the parties south of the Tweed and a few additional ones are bursting out from the relic of Ukip.

What will be illuminating is how the duopoly and the LibDem add-on “branches” in Scotland react when their Anglo-headquarters rupture! Or are they just waiting as usual to be told what to think and say?

In particular, there is a key sub-sector north of the Tweed, namely, Labour for Indy and those Labour members and councillors who align with the Tories against the “branch”. Interesting times ahead!

READ MORE: Resigning Labour MPs face online calls for by-elections

The Labour MP for Edinburgh South, Ian Murray, has warned Corbyn the party faces an even greater split. Things are beginning to look dire for Labour wherever it is. Out of power since goodness knows when north and south of the Tweed, split on Brexit, but at least the “branch” in Scotland supported Remain. It is now even trailing the Tories in Scotland and was losing support even before this latest crisis! Where does it go now? Its head office is in turmoil! As it now looks likely that Labour under Jeremy Corbyn down south is terminally weakened, the heart must have now gone out of the “branch”? Still, it gave tacit support to the Tories to keep the SNP out and ended up with the Tories outperforming them! Who is the eejit noo?

The UK aka England is also in a real existential crisis at present within its parties and its institutions. With a group of Tories down south also thinking about their future within Theresa May’s fracturing party, it is looking like a gaping hole appearing in front of us as Theresa May treks back again to Brussels to try to reopen the Withdrawal Agreement. The now fabled strong and stable country is fissuring.

One can only stare and see what happens tomorrow and beyond on a daily basis.

John Edgar
Kilmaurs

WE have witnessed a catalogue of missed chances over the last two years. Surely, when the magnitude of the Brexit “plans” became apparent in 2016, then was the time to recognise that no one political party could cope. It would have been a sign of strength to have then said that what the country needed would be a coalition government, representative of its citizens, which was obliged to agree to our democratic principles.

Unfortunately, the PM was too stubborn a person to be fit for her position, too closed-minded – and her cabinet ministers were a nest of vipers.

Now that the Labour party has at last broken ranks, is it too late to try to mend the fences and form a united front that would at least restore some credibility among our European neighbours and ourselves? Perhaps our own Ian Blackford’s wishes to co-operate with like-minded members of the Labour party in particular might be realised after all?

Janet Cunningham
Stirling

MAY I please take issue with David Roche (Letters, February 18) over his comments on “Jimmys and Wee Marys” at St Andrews University, a phenomenon I personally never encountered, in the sixties, though it may perhaps have become common in recent years.

As an alumnus myself – or in these politically correct times, perhaps I should say “alumna” – I had a large circle of friends during my years as a student. Though I came from a very impoverished background and an ordinary local secondary school, this group included one or two from Scottish private and English public and grammar schools, a Jamaican, a couple of sons of tribal chiefs in Ghana and Nigeria, and an American heiress.

READ MORE: Letters, February 18

Not once did I encounter a disparaging comment from anyone and we linked up in our range of social activities in various groupings according to our interests, not our background, accent or country of origin. For us, St Andrews was a totally inclusive experience, introducing us to the wider world and teaching us that wherever we came from, we were all just people – all different in some ways but all the same as human beings the world over.

By including this disparaging comment, your correspondent weakens his otherwise valid argument. If indeed there is now a culture within the university student population that looks down on some while respecting others, it is a sad reflection of the current trend of putting everyone into their own box with an identifying label as X, Y or Z. Surely a divisive way of seeking to promote inclusivity and equality?

L McGregor (a Wee Mary!)
Falkirk

ANDREW Tickell’s article in the Sunday National (History shows Spanish trial of Catalonia’s politicians will only backfire, February 17) gives an interesting and clear, but disappointing, insight into the meaning of the “right of self-determination” under the UN Charter.

Andrew says that, in the eyes of the overwhelming majority of international lawyers, “self-determination” does not actually mean “becoming an independent country”. They apparently regard voting in Westminster elections as a form of self-determination!

READ MORE: Spain's trial of Catalan politicians reveals sad ghost of a mature democracy

Although I have total confidence in Andrew’s understanding and interpretation of the law, it seems weird, to say the least, that the expression “self-determination” has a totally different legal meaning to how the term is normally understood.

The Kosovo case was raised in the article, and the UK’s QC, Daniel, Bethlehem, was said to have told the Court that “Kosovo, for its part, has made it quite clear that, given the legacy of abuse, it cannot again become part of Serbia. Courts do not order estranged spouses to continue in a broken marriage.”

Of course, Kosovo’s experience is totally different in nature to that of Scotland. However, I cannot escape the appeasing thought that another country, in a possible future UN Court enquiry concerning Scotland’s journey to be an Independent country, might come to our aid and refer the Court to the democratic abuse that Scotland has suffered at Westminster’s hands, using the same argument as they themselves did in the Kosovo case!

Dennis White
Blackwood