Readers' Letters: Why on earth build homes on a flood plain?

The phrase seems self‑explanatory. These are areas shaped by nature to cope with flooding, and they look beautiful in a way that only flood plains can. They are very fertile, as can be seen on any flood plain worldwide.

The only reasons I can think of for building on such ground are either ignorance or greed. Ignorance of the history and geography of the land, or greed in neglecting to inform purchasers of the risk in order to make a profit. I wouldn’t like to say which category planning committees fall into.

It is clear that hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of people are now in a situation where they cannot insure, sell or rent their properties. They are trapped not by nature, not by their own greed, but by trusting those in a position to know the truth.

If we then force the authorities to build “flood defences”, the river will simply move elsewhere to release the pressure. Water does not vanish because we build walls around it; it simply moves to the next weak point, often shifting the danger onto communities who had no part in the original decision.

“The best‑laid schemes o’ mice an’ men

"Gang aft agley.”

Building on flood plains is simply that mistake repeated in concrete and Tarmac.

Judith Campbell, Portree, Highland

Move matches

Given the febrile state of American society, it's hardly surprising football fans have been encouraged not to attend the upcoming World Cup Finals, to be held later this year in the US, Mexico and Canada.

There's absolutely no reason they can't attend the matches in Canada and Mexico, but the US is another matter entirely. Under the increasingly erratic presidency of Donald Trump, with the gun-toting ICE agents creating havoc, including the killings of Renee Good and Alex Pretti in Minneapolis, it is unsafe, to say the least.

If America is unsafe for football supporters, is it not equally dodgy for the players? I would suggest that it is and it makes perfect sense to play all the matches in Canada and Mexico. Trump is already interfering with the whole process, not least through his unhealthy friendship with Fifa president Gianni Infantino.

Such a move would make it a win win situation for players and fans alike.

Ian Petrie, Edinburgh

Wrong focus

The polls for the Holyrood May election carry a stark message: an SNP/Green coalition is currently leading. Would this outcome actually benefit Scotland?

Both of these parties are imposing their personal views upon us. Typical examples are gender reforms that most people don't want, or even the ludicrous ban on pavement parking for cars that is already causing chaos on every side street.

Nothing exposes the hypocrisy of the Greens and SNP like the constant vilification of Israel over civilian deaths in Gaza while radio silence continues over far worse deliberate killing of Iranians, who are all civilians, by its own government.

If Scotland is to change direction then we need this to start with Holyrood and we desperately need politicians who are more concerned with helping everyone, not just focus groups.

Gerald Edwards, Glasgow

Done that

In reply to Mark Openshaw’s excellent letter (28 January) on voting for experienced politicians, I would comment by saying most of us in Scotland did exactly what he said at the general election in 2024. Most of the electorate did in fact vote for the best pro-UK party candidate, with the result being the decimation of the SNP vote .

Scott Miller, Joppa, Edinburgh

Left leaning

While high-profile defections are helpful to Reform UK, because they bring their experience of government, they serve to obscure the fact that most of Reform’s Scottish voters previously voted for left-wing parties, especially Labour.

To take last week’s Glenrothes by-election for Fife Council as an example, Reform’s 27.5 per cent of the vote was contributed to by Labour’s vote dropping by almost 17 per cent, the SNP’s by 5 per cent and the Tories’ by nearly 5 per cent.

Put another way, over 60 per cent of Reform’s voters were ex-Labour and fewer than 20 per cent were ex-Tories.

Otto Inglis, Crossgates, Fife

Hidden talent

Stephen Flynn says the SNP has “loads of talented politicians” (“Flynn: I’m not worried about MSPs briefing against me”, 28 January). One has to ask whey none of them appear to be in the Scottish Parliament!

Brian Barbour, Haddington, East Lothian

Utter nonsense

There are fewer than 100 days to go until the Scottish Parliamentary election. All the parties are full on now on social media. Some messages, however, appear to be more sleekit than others. The latest SNP one states “Vote SNP to sack Starmer”. By voting for MSPs?

Disingenuous, misleading, actually just utter nonsense. Is it any wonder people are fed up with politicians?

Jane Lax, Aberlour, Moray

Tell truth

The SNP administration says it will comply with the latest Court ruling – how kind of them to say they would obey the law – but also tell us it was working to avoid identifying people involved in the intrigue of the Salmond-Sturgeon business. The Commissioner ruled the administration wrongly withheld information relating to the ongoing investigation and is threatening action against them.

What was it the SNP said about openness and transparency when they were seeking election? Every soupcon of information, which taxpayers are entitled to see, must be pulled from them as a dentist would a wisdom tooth.

Alexander McKay, Edinburgh

Last quango?

John Swinney has just announced yet another quango has been set up to address the housing emergency.

Would that be the emergency the SNP created over the last 18 years? That now makes the total number of quangos 132.

Many regard these quangos as bureaucratic entities and their accountability, or rather lack of it, has been frequently raised but nothing done to reduce the number.

The cost is an eye-watering £6.6 billion a year, yes you read correctly, billion not million. Time for the long-awaited Bonfire of the quangos.

Clark Cross, Linlithgow, West Lothian

A man’s a man

David Mitchell (Letters, 28 January) is probably right to surmise that Scottish Bard Robert Burns would have, even in today’s febrile political and social environment, adopted the motto of “live and let live”. However, his criticism of Martin O’Gorman’s view (Letters, 27 January) is probably wide of the mark.

We live in a society where too many people have been indoctrinated to believe that men can become women and vice-versâ, when the truth is that sex is determined at conception and is immutable. Some politicians have struggled to define what a “woman” is. It is hard to believe that Robert Burns was in any doubt about the difference between a man and a woman.

Jill Stephenson, Edinburgh

Customer last

With knowledge bursting out, human minds are becoming more restricted due to Artificial Intelligence, and customer care service attitudes in general are becoming increasingly frustrating. AI is threatening simple logic and common sense.

Mindless protocols are paving the way towards a donkey’s kingdom.

You phone a service provider, and you are greeted by a virtual assistant – only to have your nerves tested.

Your first difficulty is figuring out how to make this machine understand your individual scenario, which may not even be programmed into it. Consider yourself lucky if, by playing a few tricks, the virtual assistant actually gives you the opportunity to be connected to an human advisor.

The misery is not yet over. The human advisor on the other end, you will soon realise, is controlled by another layer of AI consisting of processes and protocols. On many occasions in the past, my calls have been disconnected simply because I couldn’t remember my password.

On one occasion, when speaking to a car finance team about my remaining term, they were unable to identify me, and before the advisor could disconnect, I asked him: what if I have a general query, forget about my account with your company, but the gentleman was certain that I was definitely a scam, and the call was hung up.

Try calling a bank when you do not hold an account with them – you will quickly discover how difficult it is to find anyone willing or able to help.

If AI is to be integrated into customer service, it should enhance the human experience, not diminish it. At the moment it feels as though both customers and frontline staff are becoming slaves to systems that lack flexibility, empathy and simple common sense.

Imran Muhammad, Glasgow

Write to The Scotsman

We welcome your thoughts – NO letters submitted elsewhere, please. Write to [email protected] including name, address and phone number – we won't print full details. Keep letters under 300 words, with no attachments, and avoid 'Letters to the Editor/Readers’ Letters' or similar in your subject line – be specific. If referring to an article, include date, page number and heading. And please do ensure any names mentioned are correct.