ANOTHER week, another Brexit column, although by the time you read it, there is every chance that everything will have changed again!

Over a million people marched in London to demand a say on the deal and millions more signed a petition to Parliament asking it to revoke Article 50, including well over 10,000 from East Lothian. The march was driven by a heartfelt view that something is wrong; the petition, I think, driven by a feeling there is a better way. Other people have said 17 million people voted to leave, this is not respecting the referendum and 80 per cent of elected politicians said they would.

Who is right? I suggest both groups are.

In 2016, the Government held an advisory referendum with the question ‘should the UK remain a member of the EU or leave the EU?’ Three years later we have a far greater idea of the titanic upheaval our departure will cause. There is no economic analysis that shows we will, in the short or even medium term, be better off.

Some people say we should just leave with no deal and rely on World Trade Organisation rules. This will also cause economic harm unless we agree a free trade agreement. If no free trade agreement is in place, there are set tariffs for many products, such as dairy, just under 36 per cent, and electrical machinery, 2.5 per cent. If there is one, then some imports will be cheaper and put our local manufacturers at a disadvantage.

Should we revoke Article 50 and/or give the public another choice? We are not in an agreed place, so revoking Article 50 will give the space for an informed discussion to take place – a discussion that can reflect the economic reality and, I believe more importantly, the wider cultural and community impact of Brexit.

Revoking Article 50 does not mean not leaving the EU, if that is the will of the people – that is why a deal needs to be put to the people so that, with a proper understanding, they can make a final decision.