Readers' letters: AI delivers its verdict on GERS figures controversy

To get a better understanding of the capabilities of Artificial Intelligence, I have been experimenting with ChatGPT.

As an experiment, I took Peter Newman’s letter regarding the GERs figures (August 17) and pasted it into the app. Mr Newman’s letter argues that the GERS figures are limited in assessing Scotland’s true economic potential and overlook the opportunities that independence could offer for re-prioritising spending.

I then asked ChatGPT to produce a letter challenging the premise of the letter and rebutting the points made and a second letter supporting the premise with additional points that contribute to that case.

Could Aritificial Intelligence be the key to resolving intractable political differences? (Picture: stock.adobe.com)

Almost instantly, it produced two letters each of which, I think, would have been accepted for publication. The arguments these letters contain are so familiar and well rehearsed that, if regular readers were to review them without knowing who wrote them, they would probably attribute them to regular correspondents to the Scotsman who align with one position or the other.

I then asked the question “Which of these two letters do you consider is a more realistic representation of the true position?” The conclusion it provided is as follows:

“The first letter [challenging the premise] likely offers a more realistic assessment of Scotland’s current financial situation based on existing structures, but the second letter [supporting the premise] represents a valid and hopeful argument for those who believe in the transformative potential of independence. Both positions have merit, but the first letter is more aligned with the cautious analysis favoured by mainstream economists and experts on Scotland’s public finances today.”

That seems a fair assessment of where public discourse is today.

George Rennie, Inverness

Peace dividend?

According to Peter Newman, GERS “does not look at what an independent country could spend if it was, for example, to reallocate massive defence spending to welfare payments or business seed capital funding in a non-nuclear Scotland” (Letters, August 17).

Firstly, there wouldn’t be any “massive defence spending” to reallocate. This money comes directly from the UK Government.

Secondly, let’s examine Mr Newman’s claim about an alleged dividend for a non-nuclear Scotland. Faslane is the biggest single-site employer in the country, giving work to 7,000 people. Hundreds, possibly thousands of others are employed in spin-off jobs providing goods and services to HM Naval Base Clyde and its workforce.

In addition, around 6,000 other employees are in defence-related industries here. Just imagine if all this were to be shut down by pacifist SNP zealots.

And what about our single atomic power station at Torness, due to be decommissioned in a few years? There are serious concerns over the consequences of the Scottish Government’s irrational rejection of a clean, reliable form of energy which doesn’t release greenhouse gases.

Scottish separatists have indulged in some extraordinary fantasies over the last few decades, such as an apparent belief that missile strikes on England would respect the political border they so yearn for.

Mr Newman’s letter articulates the anti-nuclear aspect of these escapist notions most eloquently.

Martin O’Gorman, Edinburgh

Change the record

Brian Wilson states that if Scotland was a business it would be insolvent (Scotsman, August 17). By definition, then, if Brian Wilson was a record it would be broken. Why does he hate Scotland so much?

Brian Kelly, Edinburgh

Fit for a King

It seems that yet another non-starter has arisen in the gripe and moan campaign about how wonderful we are and how ghastly the English are. I note that Gordon Macintyre led the charge in his August 14 letter. He describes the English rugby team as “offensive” because they use the National Anthem. He doesn't seem to see any incongruity in the fact that it is exactly that. It is the National Anthem. The Anthem for all of us in the UK.

Colin McAllister rises to the cause and refers to the “arrogant assumption that English equals British” (Letters, August 15). It “shows the lack of respect that feeds Scottish nationalism”. Come on, Colin. Scottish nationalism doesn’t need ready-made “arrogant assumptions”. It makes them up in a garret somewhere in Dundee!

As a man of a certain age, I can clearly remember going to Murrayfield in the far-off days of the 1960s when we all sang the National Anthem. The English rugby team has no responsibility for the English fans opting to retain that as the anthem for their team. Probably their governing body made that decision. However, it was an active decision made north of the Border that saddled our team with the dismal dirge of Flower of Scotland and no-one else’s.

There is only one National Anthem and good for England for keeping it. I wouldn't stand up for Flower of Scotland. When I saw the Corries singing it decades ago, no-one stood up and I am jiggered if I am going to start now. We should all use God Save the King.

Andrew HN Gray, Edinburgh

Back to basics

As a regular Scotsman reader, I never cease to be appalled by the reports about this SNP government claiming to be financially disadvantaged by the actions of the UK Government.

It seems our government seek to find anyone to blame for their own mismanagement rather than accept they themselves are fully responsible.

I could easily list numerous times they have spent our money without due care, including the most obvious: the ferries debacle. However, easier to fix than that would be to discontinue the unnecessary spend on the numerous pretend overseas embassies they have opened and staffed for years at considerable cost.

It seems to me that our government would be well advised to get back to basics and spent only what is required while tying to remain within budget rather than try to impress on something that at the end of the day they have no requirement for. Or is that too simple for them to understand?

Mike Piper, Edinburgh

The ba’s burst

At 4.59pm on Thursday August 15, Dunfermline Fussball Gmbh, the owners of Dunfermline Athletic, picked up their ball and ran away.

They did not actually have the common decency to consult with or forewarn the four loyal local directors.

As they did so, they issued a statement which was a gratuitous, long-winded, arrogant, patronising, swipe at the little people; the 5,500 fans who are the lifeblood of the club. In the last four years I have seen Premier League Scouts in the East End Stand more often than I have seen them.

It has been cringeworthy, on a Saturday, to watch manager James McPake perform verbal contortions, in interviews to camera, to avoid pointing out the Emperor's clothes – i.e. the threadbare squad which will now be the German investors’ legacy. We have 17 adult players, our main rivals average nine more. The Germans, predictably, harped on about the Training Academy, (the astroturf and portable buildings in Rosyth) but, while the expense spent on that (largely from grants and on our floodlights and pitch was, indeed, welcome, it has been at the calamitous expense of our first team.

Despite that, our talented popular management duo of McPake and Dave MacKay kept us mid-table last season and avoided the drop with often ten players out injured. The callous Germans have pulled the rug from under their feet.

With no massive club in the Championship this season, one would have expected a Pars challenge with an average gate of 5,500 and 3,400 season tickets. Instead, the club, which badly needed a cup run, both on and off the pitch, was humiliated in the League Cup, hamstrung by a lack of fit players or even a second goalie, like a local village pub side.

Numerous polite requests have been made to invite the Germans to come here and communicate with us. We have been treated with utter contempt.

John Lloyd, Inverkeithing, Fife

Holiday hell

Having just visited Caithness (staying near Kinlochbervie) for the first time in 40 years nothing has changed and everything has changed. The beauty and grandeur of the mountains, lochs and golden beaches are still as captivating as they always were.

What has changed is the people. The NC 500 has attracted a ridiculous amount of campervan traffic, clogging up the single-track roads that are totally unsuited to those types of vehicles with rude drivers unaccustomed to passing place etiquette. I’m also very unclear how this mass form of tourism benefits the local economy.

The well-chronicled objection to this influx is understandable but we were very sad to experience first-hand how this translates into intimidating and aggressive behaviour to visitors perpetrated, judging by the accents, by highly sensitised ‘incomers’ who, having rushed to adopt the land, have failed totally in learning how to behave there, completely at odds with the traditional Highland welcome.

The infrastructure for waste disposal is very poor with very little signage directing you to bottle banks and wheelie bins resulting in some inadvertent depositing of rubbish. Someone needs to take responsibility or there will be consequences. But, there is no excuse for the behaviour we experienced, which reflects very badly on the area.

David Cowan, Berkhamsted, Herts

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.