Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner.

Defiant Highland care chief pledges north “named person” scheme will continue

Highland care and learning director Bill Alexander.
Highland care and learning director Bill Alexander.

A defiant architect of the controversial “named person” scheme in the Highlands has pledged it will continue despite a government U-turn.

Highland Council’s director of care and learning Bill Alexander insisted it had shown a “positive impact” on children’s welfare and been “totally embraced”.

But campaigners who successfully fought a legal challenge against data-sharing elements of the “totalitarian” national policy suggested he was in denial about the implications of the Supreme Court ruling.

Named Person Scheme: U-turn means parents don’t have to accept advice

Mr Alexander conceded that the information-sharing part of the project was now under review.

He claimed however that the overall concept has been good for children in the north and should go on.

Deputy First Minister John Swinney confirmed last week that parents would not be forced to accept advice from a so-called named person.

The volte-face followed a Supreme Court ruling that data-sharing elements of the scheme were “incompatible” with “the right to privacy and family life”.

Mr Swinney said the Children and Young People Bill for state guardians would no longer include mandatory information-sharing by the authorities about potentially vulnerable children.

Mr Alexander piloted the scheme, as part of a wider “Getting it right for every Child” policy which was created in 2010 to offer greater protection for vulnerable youngsters.

He is confident the dramatic u-turn would “bring clarity to the legislation – clarity for the nurse, the GP, the teacher and the social worker”.

Mr Alexander said: “The critical issue is that the previous version talked about a duty to share information. It’s now a duty to consider sharing information.

Named Person Scheme: Families consider suing after private information shared

“What the legislation seeks to do is set out my responsibilities to manage the system and puts behind that guidance that teases that out in terms of what practice should look like on the ground, including looking ahead to the new data protection legislation. It won’t change anything.

“Getting it right for every Child works. It’s been totally embraced. Families are happy and it’s had a positive impact.

“It doesn’t mean that risk has gone or that the system is perfect. It does mean the system is working much better and that risk is reduced for many children.

“Materially, nothing has changed in any substantial way. We’ll reflect on the legislation and the guidance. We’ll reflect on our practice model guidance and if it needs to be improved on the basis of what’s in the legislation that will go in.”

He maintains that the work in Highland means many more vulnerable children get support and quicker.

The number of “looked after children” is down about 15% – from 501 in 2007 to 440 last year.

‘Child at risk’ numbers are down between 15% and 20% “because of early intervention,” Mr Alexander says.

The number of Highland children on the child protection register has dropped from 130 in 2007 to 104 in 2016 – although that is higher than a low over that period of 60 in 2008.

He said he had no regrets, although communicating the message could have been better handled.

Simon Calvert of the pressure group No To Named Persons (NO2NP) successfully fought the scheme in the UK Supreme Court, forcing significant changes to the scheme.

Speaking yesterday, he said: “Mr Alexander sounds as if he might need a named person himself to help him with his reading – reading the Supreme Court judgement, that is.

“The judges regarded his named person scheme as having the whiff of the totalitarian state about it. That’s hardly something to be proud of.

“As far as the beating heart of the Named Person scheme goes, the power to grab and share private information on families, that’s been ripped out thanks to the Supreme Court.

“In that respect, it’s as if the named person legislation was never passed.

“The Court also forced the government to make clear that the scheme is voluntary, though families are still not being given a clear statutory opt out in the new bill.”

He added: “Finding neglected or abused children is like finding a needle in a haystack and the named person scheme makes the haystack a lot bigger.”

Already a subscriber? Sign in

[[title]]

[[text]]