Scottish Politics Thread

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Then you've not been keeping up with events over the last couple of months then have you, been busy fixing fangs?
My time are has been rather occupied with many things, none of them David Cameron related!

Off to Shetland the night to do some lecturing the morn.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Looks like John Swinney will today announce he is to repeal the controversial 'Named Person' laws.

I am genuinely saddened by that. We have worked very successfully up in Highland with GIRFEC for decades.

It is not the pariah that it is portrayed to be, it is a means of coordinating information on vulnerable children.

It would be far harder for Tiny Miss F without that system.

And many of the Foster children coming through our doors have benefitted from its protection.
 

Dredd

LE
I am genuinely saddened by that. We have worked very successfully up in Highland with GIRFEC for decades.

It is not the pariah that it is portrayed to be, it is a means of coordinating information on vulnerable children.

It would be far harder for Tiny Miss F without that system.

And many of the Foster children coming through our doors have benefitted from its protection.
Gen question, but what is preventing someone from coordinating information on vulnerable children already then? What did the additional layer of bureaucracy add to it?

If the Highlands have been working it for decades, then how is that preventing the other areas from doing the same? And since the legislation is less than 10 years old, it seems it was already being done beforehand so it was irrelevant.

I am genuinely confused. An area has been doing it for some time to link up various agencies to help the needy, but everywhere else apparently needs specific legislation to achieve the same thing.
 
Gen question, but what is preventing someone from coordinating information on vulnerable children already then? What did the additional layer of bureaucracy add to it?

If the Highlands have been working it for decades, then how is that preventing the other areas from doing the same? And since the legislation is less than 10 years old, it seems it was already being done beforehand so it was irrelevant.

I am genuinely confused. An area has been doing it for some time to link up various agencies to help the needy, but everywhere else apparently needs specific legislation to achieve the same thing.
I would have thought that if Highland is seen as "best practice" - @Fang_Farrier could you confirm if this was/is the case - then the other authorities should have adopted it without the legislation and would have saved all the hassles.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I would have thought that if Highland is seen as "best practice" - @Fang_Farrier could you confirm if this was/is the case - then the other authorities should have adopted it without the legislation and would have saved all the hassles.
Yes they should be using GIRFEC but not everybody does, there is always resistance to any new system, especially when it is portrayed as the epitome of evil and nanny state overlords.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Gen question, but what is preventing someone from coordinating information on vulnerable children already then? What did the additional layer of bureaucracy add to it?

If the Highlands have been working it for decades, then how is that preventing the other areas from doing the same? And since the legislation is less than 10 years old, it seems it was already being done beforehand so it was irrelevant.

I am genuinely confused. An area has been doing it for some time to link up various agencies to help the needy, but everywhere else apparently needs specific legislation to achieve the same thing.
we've been over this many times but it is repeated reported after every child death about the lack of communication between agencies being a factor.

I could see something in the surgery and report it to the GP
Something as a mini rugby coach and report to Social work
something in the street and report to the Police.

GIRFEC merely nominated whom you should contact, even with just small bits of information which can build up a bigger picture, missed dental appointments, for instance.

The reason for the legislation was merely to force others to use what had been identified as best practice.

It's not ideal, there are flaws. what happens during a school holiday when you need to get hold of head teacher for instance but in my experience it is either trivial and can wait, or it is urgent and you would be raising a child concern form.
 

Dredd

LE
I still don't see what the State Nanny control contact was supposed to add to that then.

You have claimed that the practice in Highlands has been a great success, but is there research or report evidence to confirm that is the case? Something tangible, not just platitudes.

Since the public relations nightmare that surrounds a Baby P scenario is one that must haunt those in the caring and welfare professions, you would think they already do what they can to prevent it happening to them. If they worked together then it would be a step towards this. Having a named person was the step too far. A nameless entity is a pervasive threat, but giving it a name and face makes it a target. No wonder many didn't want to be tagged with the responsibility, just so they could get the blame for it when the next big scandal inevitably came along.

It was a laudable goal but it relies too much on State control of personal information and where it can be used for good it can also be used for evil. Mind you, as we move ever further away from the concept of privacy and personal responsibility then the ultimate objective of getting microchipped at birth and having your every movement recorded, analysed and forecast becomes less of a fantasy and more just one official statement away.

The problem is that a wealth of information in the green becomes chatter that eclipses the faint reds, so although "all the clues were there" there will likely be yet another incident - only those involved will be bewildered as to how that could happen now we monitor the minutiae of our citizens.

It was ten years ahead of it's time. We don't need a Named Person - we simply need tech and AI to "manage" us. A State that cares for you, from cradle to grave. As long as you are compliant.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
I still don't see what the State Nanny control contact was supposed to add to that then.

You have claimed that the practice in Highlands has been a great success, but is there research or report evidence to confirm that is the case? Something tangible, not just platitudes.

Since the public relations nightmare that surrounds a Baby P scenario is one that must haunt those in the caring and welfare professions, you would think they already do what they can to prevent it happening to them. If they worked together then it would be a step towards this. Having a named person was the step too far. A nameless entity is a pervasive threat, but giving it a name and face makes it a target. No wonder many didn't want to be tagged with the responsibility, just so they could get the blame for it when the next big scandal inevitably came along.

It was a laudable goal but it relies too much on State control of personal information and where it can be used for good it can also be used for evil. Mind you, as we move ever further away from the concept of privacy and personal responsibility then the ultimate objective of getting microchipped at birth and having your every movement recorded, analysed and forecast becomes less of a fantasy and more just one official statement away.

The problem is that a wealth of information in the green becomes chatter that eclipses the faint reds, so although "all the clues were there" there will likely be yet another incident - only those involved will be bewildered as to how that could happen now we monitor the minutiae of our citizens.

It was ten years ahead of it's time. We don't need a Named Person - we simply need tech and AI to "manage" us. A State that cares for you, from cradle to grave. As long as you are compliant.
On phone in airport so can't produce reports but have posted them on this thread in past.

The aspect that this failed on in court was on the information sharing, particularly without parental consent.

An example i shall give is that dental neglect is often a factor and we feed in when a child has failed 3 appointments in a row if we feel they are at risk. However we won't be able to do this in future because if they don't bring their child to appointments then they're not there to give that consent so that information will not be available
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
Oops! Not having a lot of success is St Nic. The only thing she is good at is the political assassination of anyone who looks like having a go at replacing her as leader of the SNP. Joanna Cherry just got away with her court case but give Nic time..... :threaten:
 

Mick9abf

War Hero

"In the run-up to the 18 September poll, it was reported that the Queen was concerned about the possibility of Scotland opting to sever the 300-year union with England and Wales.
A Sunday Times poll on 7 September putting the Yes campaign ahead contributed to a "mounting sense of panic" in Downing Street, Mr Cameron recalls."
Cameron is pathetically trying to sell his book and it has already backfired regarding this story - or non story depending on your viewpoint as he’s managed to drag Big Liz’ into whatever chapter it’s on.

Even Salmond is piping up about it, which tells me everything I need to know about it’s relevance......

I can’t actually believe that anyone would care what the Queen said/says in relation to a vote, or much else for that matter, which would make them sway one way or another; so the real question is why is a small percentage of the population trying to make a big deal of it; are these muppets for real?!?

Is there anyone stupid enough who would change their vote because the queen has made a comment similar to that your granny would give you when your a kid - it’s laughable tbh.
 

Fang_Farrier

LE
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Cameron is pathetically trying to sell his book and it has already backfired regarding this story - or non story depending on your viewpoint as he’s managed to drag Big Liz’ into whatever chapter it’s on.

Even Salmond is piping up about it, which tells me everything I need to know about it’s relevance......

I can’t actually believe that anyone would care what the Queen said/says in relation to a vote, or much else for that matter, which would make them sway one way or another; so the real question is why is a small percentage of the population trying to make a big deal of it; are these muppets for real?!?

Is there anyone stupid enough who would change their vote because the queen has made a comment similar to that your granny would give you when your a kid - it’s laughable tbh.
The issue is not what HMQ but that the exPM has revealed that he asked and then she made her "think very carefully" comment.

Historically what is said between monarch and PM goes unreported but this is his second offence, the first being that she purred on phone when told result.

It also brings into question Royalties impartiality in political affairs which is on top of the current exactly what powers does the monarch have that has been raised by the proroguing case in the Supreme Court.

But no relevance to current Scottish politics
 
Last edited:

Mick9abf

War Hero
The issue is not what HMQ but that the exPM has revealed that he asked and then she made her "think very carefully" comment.

Historically what is said between monarch and PM goes unreported but this is his second offence, the first being that she purred on phone when told result.

It also brings into question Royalties impartiality in political affairs which is on top of the current exactly what powers does the monarch have that has been raised by the proroguing case in the Supreme Court.
He’s the same as every other failed politician trying to sell something who can’t keep his mouth shut.

Furthermore the comment was to a ‘well wisher’ outside Crathes church or similar, what was the context of the conversation prior, was she asked about what she thought? It’s far to easy to make quantum leaps.

The proroguing case is very interesting, and it’ll be interesting to see how it turns out, however, I’m sure if the Queen had knocked back that mutant Boris for his shutdown we still wouldn’t be further forward (in relation to Brexit) as quite frankly the politicians in this country cannot get past their own interests.
 
Last edited:

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor
The Scottish government dropping yet another key target/initiative

Coming hard behind the ditching of the Named Person scheme one is left to wonder if there are any SNP policies left? Remember Indyref2 is not yet a policy, just a dream.

Still, it will give the Scottish parliament more time to judge the First Minister on her education policies which she urged parliament to do. Not sure she will get a pass mark though.
 
The Scottish government dropping yet another key target/initiative

Coming hard behind the ditching of the Named Person scheme one is left to wonder if there are any SNP policies left? Remember Indyref2 is not yet a policy, just a dream.

Still, it will give the Scottish parliament more time to judge the First Minister on her education policies which she urged parliament to do. Not sure she will get a pass mark though.
I was just reading it, just as you posted it, I was wondering what will be the next one they will abandon.
 

Auld-Yin

ADC
Kit Reviewer
Book Reviewer
Reviews Editor

Latest Threads

Top