Holyrood debating Named Person state guardianship today

The Scottish Parliament is today, 8th June , debating whether or not to put on ice – pending serious examination [for the fist time] of the wildly ill conceived and ill specified Named Person scheme of state guardianship for all babies and all young people in Scotland.

This comes at a time when a poll has shown that fewer people than in 2014 would vote now for Scottish independence – whether or not the UK goes Brexit; and at a time when two former party seniors, Jim Sillars and Gordon Wilson, have recommended the SNP ‘to stop digging’ on the ill fated Named Person excursion and bin it.

The debate to discuss mothballing the scheme pending the sort of scrutiny it ought to have had from ALL politicians at Holyrood frm the outset is wise.

Our of this mess can come a targeted scheme to protect children seen by elementary tests to be at risk – the sort of rudimentary indicators that would have saved the lives of Liam Fee and others – had they been taken as seriously as they ought to have been.

What the scheme has usefully identified is the value of a single qualified person:

  • appointed to a specific child at the first reported sign of potential risk;
  • to whom all information from all sources comes, where it indicates potential risk to a notified child;
  • and from whom comes instructions to specific protection agencies on necessary investigative and protective actions to be taken without delay.

It is in the interests of the SNP that they do not put stubborn face saving above the safety and health of children at risk – and the Scottish Conservatives’ motion today has the grace to give them room for constructive face saving in a shared re-examination of how best to protect children at real risk.

· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·

Related Articles & Comments

  • Either way the Scottish Tories gain – I would prefer that the first option comes true and the SNP act with humility and in the spirit of consensus their leader talks about a lot – and pauses this legislation due to the very valid and serious concerns.
    If the SNP do their usual ‘we’re morally superior and anyone who disagrees is just wrong’ act, then the Tories have this up their sleeve in 2021 – which will be enough time for the unintended consequences of this legislation to come to fruition – and families all over Scotland suffering.

    Ruth Davidson is gearing up for 2021 and coalition government. Just like at the election, Labour and the SNP will ignore that until it’s too late.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 3

    JB June 8, 2016 11:27 am Reply
    • Best Fiction this month!

      Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 9

      A.Salmon June 8, 2016 2:21 pm Reply
      • It was good fiction a year ago when I predicted the Tories would be second place this May..what I got wrong was just how large the victory over Labour actually was…

        Is just that type of complacency, amongst other things, that will indeed continue to bolster support for Ruth Davidsons party.

        She is playing the SNP at their own game – and winning. I don’t think you’ve realised that yet…

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 2

        JB June 8, 2016 3:00 pm Reply
      • Your name, AS – by a country mile.

        Like or Dislike: Thumb up 3 Thumb down 1

        Robert Wakeham June 8, 2016 7:05 pm Reply
        • Your name is ridiculous .Please give us your real one?

          Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 5

          Nae Fear Here June 8, 2016 8:27 pm Reply
  • Who is the Named Person anyway? I’ve heard it may be the School Teacher or Head Teacher or some other person who regularly sees the child.
    Do these people have a choice? If I was a teacher or head teacher I’d be pretty irritated that on top of all the other demands to ‘close the gap’ and the myriad initiatives and changes thrown at Schools in the last few years, plus the budget being squeezed and recruiting good teachers a near impossibility, never mind supply teachers have rightly walked off the job because it’s not now worth them offering their services because of the renegotiated pay rates… now I have a legal obligation to be a surrogate parent for some of the most challenged young people in society. And we have some very very appalling situations in Scotland.

    I haven’t read anywhere that this additional responsibility, presumably for which if I fail to properly monitor these situations and something terrible happens I shall have some legal accountability, is being reflected anywhere in my salary, not only for the additional time and resource to implement the systems necessary to fulfil this role, but for the inevitable impact on me as an individual and for my family.

    Scotland has a lot of social issues and some kids grow up in some terrible conditions, but where is the investment in properly resourced social work services, social work training, properly paid and properly resourced capabilities? That is the way to solve it, not to layer unpaid burden on those already overstretched. They’ll have the best interests of young people at heart already and don’t need a legal obligation on them too.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 9 Thumb down 0

    Jerry McIver June 8, 2016 6:14 pm Reply
  • If ever there was a case for a 2nd chamber in holyrood, today’s debate would be at the top of the list for supporting that call.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 7 Thumb down 1

    John M June 8, 2016 6:48 pm Reply
  • Named Person scheme in argyll and bute has been a disaster. It is an open secret. Look at what happened to those poor families in Rothesay, the named person had to be removed because she didn’t know what a child protection issue was.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

    Citizen M June 8, 2016 10:06 pm Reply
  • Everyone knows Sneddon made a botched job of covering it up.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 6 Thumb down 0

    Citizen M June 8, 2016 10:09 pm Reply
  • Whether or not the Named Person scheme is workable – and I think that the intentions are good – the overwhelming need is for better funding of child protection services. Unless cuts are made elsewhere that means raising revenue, a subject which most politicians understandably tend to treat like a cat treats a plate of very hot milk.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 1 Thumb down 0

    Arthur Blue June 9, 2016 8:35 pm Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *