CAMPAIGNERS opposed to the Scottish Government’s named person scheme have accused ministers of “throwing a veil of secrecy” around its progress to reform the policy.
Education Secretary John Swinney announced an “intense’’ three-month consultation last September on how to make the scheme comply with European human rights law.
The consultation was announced after the UK Supreme Court adjudged the policy to be “incompatible’’ with the right to privacy and family life, as set out in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
Swinney intended to outline his next step before the end of 2016, but the group which mounted a legal challenge to his scheme said there have been no updates.
No To Named Persons (NO2NP) spokesman Simon Calvert said: “The engagement period was really a sham consultation because Mr Swinney only wanted to deal with those who support the scheme and organisations mainly funded by the Government. He refused to engage with us even though we represent a huge number of parents, and more than 35,000 people who signed our petition.
“The three-month ‘engagement’ has long since ended. It looks like it could be more like six or seven months, March or April 2017, before we hear anything.”
He added: “The Supreme Court agreed with us that the intrusive sharing of private information at the heart of the Named Person scheme was unlawful. The court granted our appeal, and ordered the Scottish Government to pay all our costs. It was a total defeat. The substantial delay in announcing their plans to try to navigate a way around the ruling indicates that reality is finally beginning to bite.”
The Named Person policy, part of the Children and Young People Scotland Act of 2014, set out to appoint the likes of a teacher or health visitor, to look out for the welfare of all children up to the age of 18.
After the legal challenge, Swinney was forced to act to halt the roll-out of the scheme, which he said he hopes can now come into force in August. A Scottish Government spokeswoman said: “The Deputy First Minister will update Parliament in due course.”
Why are you making commenting on The National only available to subscribers?
We know there are thousands of National readers who want to debate, argue and go back and forth in the comments section of our stories. We’ve got the most informed readers in Scotland, asking each other the big questions about the future of our country.
Unfortunately, though, these important debates are being spoiled by a vocal minority of trolls who aren’t really interested in the issues, try to derail the conversations, register under fake names, and post vile abuse.
So that’s why we’ve decided to make the ability to comment only available to our paying subscribers. That way, all the trolls who post abuse on our website will have to pay if they want to join the debate – and risk a permanent ban from the account that they subscribe with.
The conversation will go back to what it should be about – people who care passionately about the issues, but disagree constructively on what we should do about them. Let’s get that debate started!
Callum Baird, Editor of The National
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here