Why give ear to 650 wavering MPS yet ignore the indicative votes of 33 million people?

sir – Why should the Government pay any attention to the results of indicative votes by 650 duplicitous MPS when it ignores the indicative vote that was made by 33,551,983 people in June 2016?

Adrian Wright

Shaftesbury, Dorset

sir – A cabal of MPS yesterday effectively became the Government, with Oliver Letwin as de facto prime minister, with no form of democratic selection or accountability. They are proceeding to deliver the coup de grâce to Brexit.

This very British coup is also a deeply shameful one against the electorate and our democracy.

Nick Brazil

Whitchurch-on-thames, Oxfordshire

sir – What do we do now that democracy has ended?

R A Hatton

Bristol

sir – There seems a strange irony that as builders and artisans work hard under the tarpaulin and scaffolding cladding the Houses of Parliament, to repair and preserve it for generations to come, its inhabitants are working hard to destroy it.

Derek Bennett

Walsall, Staffordshire

sir – After the biggest exercise in democracy that Britain has seen, we are told Brussels has decreed, with the Government’s complicity, that we will not leave the EU tomorrow after all.

Despite trumpeting the significance of March 29 being written into law as Brexit day, No10 must have known that Jean-claude Juncker could simply rub it out. Government by fait accompli undermines democracy. I fear the British people will exact a heavy price for this cynical deceit.

Lord Shinkwin

London SW1

sir – After all that has been said by the European Research Group and others, a number of MPS are now planning to capitulate and vote for Theresa May’s dreadful deal.

How can not doing so risk there being no Brexit at all – which appears to be the argument they, including Jacob Rees-mogg, are now using?

The country voted to leave the EU, both main parties fought the last general election on that basis and the decision to do so was enshrined in law.

Surely they cannot believe that, in the final analysis, the House would vote to remain in the EU and risk civil unrest. They must continue to stand for what is right.

CD Smith

Daventry, Northamptonshire

sir – Boris Johnson (March 27) is correct. We shall be skewered if the Withdrawal Agreement is approved, but not as skewered as the Conservative Party.

The party has consistently defied the wishes of its own constituents. It elected a PM who was clearly not up to the job, so that the whole Brexit procedure would be a shambles (as it has proved to be). It refused to remove Mrs May when it had a chance and it is now happy to proceed in an unconstitutional fashion.

The Conservatives will be slaughtered at both local and national level in any future elections, which is exactly what they deserve.

Peter Murray

Beeston, Nottinghamshire

sir – Boris Johnson has often and eloquently argued that Mrs May’s plan does not represent a true Brexit. Now, at the 11th hour, we read that he, and others of similar view, are considering supporting the PM, since “otherwise there will be no Brexit at all”.

Dr John Garside

Thirsk, North Yorkshire

sir – MPS’ risible last-minute “soulsearching” brings to mind John Stuart Mill’s diary entry on middle-class doubts: “It requires in these times much more intellect to marshal so

much greater a stock of ideas and observations … hence the multitude of thoughts only breeds increase of uncertainty. Those who should be guides of the rest, see too many sides to every question. They hear so much said and find that so much can be said about everything that they feel no assurance about the truth of anything.”

Duncan Mcara

Bishopbriggs, Dunbartonshire

sir – Michel Barnier, the EU’S chef Brexit negotiator, now condescendingly says that we can stay. Why would we want to?

Charles Penfold

Ulverston, Cumbria

sir – In 1998, the House of Commons agreed to follow the recommendations of the Modernisation Committee by abandoning the embellishments of “Gallant” or “Learned” to the standard form of address “Honourable” when referring to members of the House who were either commissioned officers or senior barristers.

May I suggest the time has now come to abandon the description “Honourable” altogether when referring to members? The date for the change should be March 29 2019.

Nicholas Young

London W13