SIR - Mr Walsh may think he is not confused (Confusion and some different opinions, Craven Herald letters, November 14) but perhaps he can accept his points are contradictory or suffers from the sin of omission.

I agree that parliament delegated the question of should we stay or leave the EU. The answer was we should leave but there was no answer to the supplementary question of: How, in what way and what would our future relationship with the EU be?

I would gently remind Mr Walsh that Mr Johnson got the Bill to give effect to his "deal" through second reading in the Parliament he derides. The PM then chose to withdraw the Bill because he could not bring himself to allow a timetable longer than a couple of days for proper scrutiny of the Bill. If the government had allowed even a couple of weeks of that scrutiny we may well have been out of the EU by now.

If one then adds in that the number of Tory MPs was reduced by the PM himself expelling MPs from his own party one is bound to question his motives. The proper answer to a hung parliament is compromise made even more the sensible approach because of the Fixed Term Parliament Act. So actually Parliament's own rules seek to foster compromise, to encourage the Executive to govern for all of us not just call an election when a narcissistic PM has spit his dummy out. Besides which we might get another hung Parliament!

Anthony Bradley

Mearbeck

Long Preston