So let us just admit the Fraud. Cheat the people and they vote against you. So let us then logically analyse how Brexit became inevitable. That is the first step to repair confidence.

• How does the country escape financial ruin if all euro-based trading leaves UK and the City?
• Legal collapse (No replacement agencies are in place, nor treaties)?
• Industrial pauperisation?
• How can a country look into the future with every British and European regulation legally unsafe?

So what can be done about it?

“Action required by Parliament and Government..

1. Withdraw or suspend Article 50 Letter

2. Hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty to validate so it can be used for its Article 50.”

I also wrote to the Prime Minister Theresa May in 2016, four Secretaries of State concerned (Trade, Foreign Office, Cabinet Office and Brexit) and a number of MPs on the Brexit committees explaining the issues involved. I sent a copy of my book “Brexit and Britain’s Vision for Europe” to each of them.

A parliamentary discussion is urgently needed to review the legality of action that HMG and Parliament have already taken. Both major parties when in Government and Opposition said that a referendum was necessary to validate the EU Treaty. It can be concluded therefore that a referendum was considered legally indisputable to them.

And then they reneged.

The reasons they did not go through with this pledge and legal obligation is the crux of the debate that is now required by the public and the signatories of the petition. It also provides the solution to the Brexit dilemma.

Constitutionally and legally, the Lisbon Treaty needs to be properly validated according to their own promises, commitments and “cast-iron” guarantees of action. The EU treaty has changed not only the British constitution but added new institutions and power in Brussels “massively” modifying our relationship with Europe earlier (to quote Mr Cameron).

The previous European Community arrangement was subject to approval by referendum in 1975. No further change can be made from the Community system without a further referendum. This is especially the case as the Lisbon Treaty completely changes the European Community system so radically. Both EEC and Euratom had articles (approved by the public in the 1975 referendum) that the treaties were in force for an unlimited period.

That means that Brexit under Article 50 of a subsequent treaty is ruled out. Permanence of the democratic link to the Continent and commitment to democratic solutions in open democratic institutions cannot be overruled by a legally unsafe treaty, consistently opposed by a majority of the population. This is especially the case as the Lisbon Treaty and its earlier reincarnation were roundly rejected by other Member States in their referendums.

The petition would also provide the means to resolve the blockage in Parliament on the Withdrawal Treaty — where no majority can be found to move forward. A clarification of the UK constitutional position could provide a breathing space to consolidate UK policy. A judicial review of our democratic relations with Europe and its democracies is essential for a stable near- and long-term future. Britain’s voice is crucial for democratic reform of the European institutions to make them more open and accountable. The Democratic Deficit that has been on the political agenda for three or four decades needs to be tackled seriously.

I would therefore request that you supply me with

(a) the details about how this decision was made and clarifying the grounds it gave for rejection.

(b) the time and place the decision was made,

(c) the names of MPs who voted, with their reasoning.

(d) the system for making an Appeal because a decision was not impartial.

Yours etc